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 Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a setup definition unit configured to set sessions for an UWB” in claim 7, and
“a first ranging attempt unit configured to: allocate blocks in the sessions for the UWB; and generate an UWB ranging for the session based on time information for each block” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410, in view of Henry et al (11,470,571).
-Regarding claim 1, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 teaches a method of an UWB (ultra-wideband) ranging (referred to “method for controlling a ranging period of a multi-ranging session of UWB communication”, col. 8, lines 17-18), comprising:
setting, via a setup “setup”, n sessions “multiple sessions” for an UWB (referred to ”multiple sessions in an ultra-wideband (UWB) communication”, n being an integers greater than 1 (see col. 8, lines 20-21);
allocating blocks “schedule blocks” in the sessions for the UWB, (see col. 8, lines 27-30); and
generating an UWB ranging “ranging by incorporating an n-th UWB signal” for the sessions based on time information “size of each schedule block” for each block, wherein time information of a first block (referred to “each schedule block”) in a first session (being a n-the session “n-the session”, n=2) is generated based on a multiplication of a first multiplier (=2) and a length of a block in a n-th session, n=1, (see col. 8, line 27-36).
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 does not teach whether the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a specific integer value, as claimed.
In analogous art, Henry et al teaches that a block “burst position 1230” in a session for ranging can comprise a number of chips “chip positions 1240” for incorporation with a UWB (see col. 13, lines 16-34).
For further application, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, at the time the invention was made, to implement claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410, in view of Henry et al, in such a way that each block in each n-th session, n being integer greater than 0, of the sessions would comprises a number of chips for incorporation with the UWB, so that the implementation would become another embodiment deriving from teachings of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 and Henry et al for ranging.
So with the implementation, in the method of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410, in view of Henry et al, the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a specific integer value, in a manner that the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a multiplication of the first multiplier, the integer value (being the number of chips in a block the n-th session, n=1) and a size of a chip.
-Regarding claim 2, as for claim 1, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 teaches that the first multiplier is 2.
-Regarding claim 3, as being derived from claim 1, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 in view of Henry et al teaches that time information of a second block in a second session is generated based on a second multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that the time information of the second block (referred to “each schedule block”, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 ) in the second session (being a n-th session “n-the -session”, n=3, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410) is generated based on a multiplication of the second multiplier (=3), the specific integer value (being the number of chips in a block the a n-th session, n=1) and the size of a chip (see col. 8, lines 27-36 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 ).
-Regarding claim 4, as for claim 3, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 teaches that the second multiplier is 3.
-Regarding claim 5, as being derived from claim 1, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 in view of Henry et al teaches that time information of a third block in a third session is generated based on a third multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that the time information of the third block (referred to “each schedule block”, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 ) in the third session (being a n-th session “n-the session”, n=4, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 ) is generated based on a multiplication of the third multiplier (=4), the specific integer value (being the number of chips in a block the a n-th session, n=1) and the size of a chip (see col. 8, lines 27-36 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 ).
-Regarding claim 6, as for claim 5, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 teaches that the third multiplier is 4.
-Regarding claim 7, claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 teaches a system of an UWB (ultra-wideband) ranging (referred to “system for controlling a ranging period of a multi-ranging session of UWB communication”, col. 10, lines 16-17), comprising:
a setup definition unit (referred to “one or more processors”, col. 10, line 19) configured to set, via a setup (“setup”, col. 10, line 21), n sessions for an UWB, n being an integers greater than 1, (referred to “multiple sessions in an ultra-wideband (UWB) communication”, col. 10, lines 20-1), (see col. 10, lines 19-21);
a first ranging attempt unit (referred to “one or more processors”, col. 10, line 19) configured to: allocate blocks “schedule blocks” in the session, for the UWB (see col. 10, lines 26-27); and generate an UWB ranging “ranging by incorporating an n-th UWB signal” for a session (being a n-the session “n-the session”, n=2) based on time information for each block, wherein time information of a first block (referred to “each schedule block”) in a first session (being a n-the session “n-the session”, n=2) is generated based on a multiplication of a first multiplier (=2) and a length of a block in a n-th session, n=1, (see col. 10, line 27-36).
Claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 does not teach whether the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a specific integer value, as claimed.
In analogous art, Henry et al teaches that a block “burst position 1230” in a session for ranging can comprise a number of chips “chip positions 1240” for incorporation with a UWB (see col. 13, lines 16-34).
For further application, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, at the time the invention was made, to implement claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410, in view of Henry et al, in such a way that each block in each n-th session, n being an integer greater than 0, of the sessions would comprises a number of chips for incorporation with the UWB, so that the implementation would become another embodiment deriving from teachings of claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410 and Henry et al for ranging.
So with the implementation, in the system of claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,410, in view of Henry et al, the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a specific integer value, in a manner that the time information of the first block in the first session is generated based on a multiplication of the first multiplier, the integer value (being the number of chips in a block of the n-th session, n=1) and a size of a chip.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Henry et al.
-Regarding claim 1, Henry et al teaches a method of an UWB (ultra-wideband) ranging (“UWB ranging”, col. 13, line 8) performed by a location server (“location server 590”, col. 12, line 28), the method (see figure 12) comprising:
setting, via the location server, sessions (being UWB slots “different slots”, col. 13, line 29) for an UWB, wherein the sessions can comprise a first session (1205a), as second session (similar to the first session and subsequent to the first session) and a third session (similar to the first session and subsequent to the second session) (see col. 13, lines 6-7, 28-32);
allocating, via the location server, a number of blocks (“at least one burst 1220”, col. 13, line 14) in each one of the sessions for the UWB (see col. 13, lines 13-14); and
generating, via the location server, an UWB ranging (“UWB ranging”, col. 13, line 8) for the sessions based on time information for each block, (the time information being a size for the block),
wherein time information of a first block (referred to (1220), figure 12) in the first session is generated based on a first multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that each block consist of a first number of burst positions (1230) (referred to “one or more burst positions 1230”, col. 13, line 15) and each burst position consists of a second number of chip positions (1240) (referred to “different chip positions 1240”, col. 13, line 16), (see col. 13, lines 12-16), wherein the time information of the first block (being the size of the first block) can be indicated by a multiplication of the first multiplier (being the first number), the specific integer value (being the second number) and a size (Tc) of a chip position (see figure 12, and col. 13, lines 6-34).
-Regarding claim 2, Henry et al teaches that each block can consist of 2 burst positions (referred to “each burst 1220 includes one or more bust positions 1230”, col. 13, lines 14-15), , or namely, the first multiplier/the first number is 2.
-Regarding claim 3, Henry et al teaches that time information of a second block in the second session is generated based on a second multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that in the second session, each block consist of the first number of burst positions (1230) (referred to “one or more burst positions 1230”, col. 13, line 15) and each burst position consists of the second number of chip positions (1240) (referred to “different chip positions 1240”, col. 13, line 16), (see col. 13, lines 12-16), wherein the time information of the second block (being the size of each block in the second session) can be indicated by a multiplication of the second multiplier (being the first number), the specific integer value (being the second number) and a size (Tc) of a chip position (see figure 12, and col. 13, lines 6-34).
-Regarding claim 4, Henry et al teaches that each block can consist of 3 burst positions (referred to “each burst 1220 includes one or more bust positions 1230”, col. 13, lines 14-15), , or namely, the second multiplier/ the first number is 3.
-Regarding claim 5, Henry et al teaches that time information of a third block in the third session is generated based on a third multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that in the third session, each block consist of the first number of burst positions (1230) (referred to “one or more burst positions 1230”, col. 13, line 15) and each burst position consists of the second number of chip positions (1240) (referred to “different chip positions 1240”, col. 13, line 16), (see col. 13, lines 12-16), wherein the time information of the third block (being the size of each block in the third session) can be indicated by a multiplication of the third multiplier (being the first number), the specific integer value (being the second number) and a size (Tc) of a chip position (see figure 12, and col. 13, lines 6-34).
-Regarding claim 6, Henry et al teaches that each block can consist of 4 burst positions (referred to “each burst 1220 includes one or more bust positions 1230”, col. 13, lines 14-15), or namely, the third multiplier/the first number is 4.
-Regarding claim 7, Henry et al teaches a system (being a location server (referred to “location server 590”, col. 12, line 28, col. 16, line 7)), of an UWB (ultra-wideband) ranging (“UWB ranging”, col. 13, line 8), the system comprising:
a setup definition unit (referred to “processor(s) 1606”, col. 16, lines 20-24) configured to set sessions (being UWB slots “different slots”, col. 13, line 29) for an UWB, wherein the sessions can comprise a first session (1205a), as second session (similar to the first session and subsequent to the first session) and a third session (similar to the first session and subsequent to the second session) (see col. 13, lines 6-7, 28-32);
a first ranging attempt unit (referred to “processor(s) 1606”, col. 16, lines 20-24) configured to: allocate a number of blocks (“at least one burst 1220”, col. 13, line 14) in each one of the sessions for the UWB (see col. 13, lines 13-14); and generate an UWB ranging (“UWB ranging”, col. 13, line 8) for the sessions based on time information for each block, (the time information being a size for the block),
wherein time information of a first block (referred to (1220), figure 12) in the first session is generated based on a first multiplier and a specific integer value, in a manner that each block consist of a first number of burst positions (1230) (referred to “one or more burst positions 1230”, col. 13, line 15) and each burst position consists of a second number of chip positions (1240) (referred to “different chip positions 1240”, col. 13, line 16), (see col. 13, lines 12-16), wherein the time information of the first block (being the size of the first block) can be indicated by a multiplication of the first multiplier (being the first number), the specific integer value (being the second number) and a size (Tc) of a chip position (see figure 12, and col. 13, lines 6-34).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG M PHU whose telephone number is (571)272-3009. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-16:00.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/PHUONG PHU/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2632