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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20220271793 A1 in view of D2 EP 4400859 A1(not necessarily required but for the completeness of the rejection).
Regarding claims 1,10 19 D1 teaches
1. A method implemented by a controller of a vehicle for determining a position of a mobile device relative to a vehicle, comprising:
detecting, via ultra-wideband (UWB) anchors of a vehicle, time-of-flight (TOF) messages exchanged between the UWB anchors and a mobile device in a ranging mode;[0028] and (fig. 4)
responsive to a lack of receipt of TOF messages(conditional limitation in claims 1-9 does not have patentable weight as they are method claims) from a quantity of the UWB anchors necessary for performing trilateration for at least a plurality of consecutive ranging rounds, switching to a radar mode to detect angle of arrival and distance information between the UWB anchors and the mobile device;[0028]-[0031](one of ordinary skills in the art knows disadvantages of different modes as D1 teaches using all three modes fig. 4 according to [0028]-[0031] high accuracy can be achieved )
responsive to switching to the radar mode on one or more of the UWB anchors, receiving channel impulse response (CIR) data from the UWB anchors;[0028-0031]
determining a position of the mobile device based on the CIR data and the TOF messages; and[0028-0031]
utilizing the position of the mobile device for one or more vehicle applications.[0032]
For completeness of the rejection Examiner wants to note that D1 does not explicitly teach trilateration requirements(and trilateration per se) but rather teaches that UWB requires multiple anchors [0029] but one of Ordinary skills in the art would recognize that positioning with UWB only requires at least 3 anchors to position in 3D and lack of one would create degree of freedom and ambiguity. For example D2 EP 4400859 A1 Explicitly teaches trilateration using at least three radio links and radar (page 5 and page 6 ) and then compare the values and if necessary replace one with the other one which will implicitly happen in case one radio link is missing .
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D1 with invention by D2 in order replace or correct the measurement by UWB in case ambiguities are present.
2, 12. The method of claim 1, further comprising calculating angle of arrival (AOA) of signals from the mobile device and the distance information using the CIR data from the UWB anchors and using the AOA information to select radar data from the UWB anchors closest to the UWB anchors providing the TOF messages when determining the position of the mobile device.D1: [0028]+ fig. 4
3, 13, 20. The method of claim 1, further comprising scheduling all of the UWB anchors to perform in the radar mode, the angle of arrival and distance determination. D1: [0031]
Although D1 does not explicitly teach
4, 14, 21. The method of claim 1, further comprising scheduling only the UWB anchors for which the TOF messages are received to perform, in the radar mode, the angle of arrival and distance determination.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D1 in order to save computation power and don’t spend time on calculation of the radar mode if the position can be correctly identified.
5, 15. The method of claim 1, further comprising scheduling UWB radar sessions in the radar mode and UWB ranging sessions in the ranging mode by configuring specific ones of the UWB anchors to send radar packets without overlapping with other UWB anchors and without interfering with slots reserved for ranging.(D1 fig. 4)
6, 16. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more vehicle applications include an application for providing secure access to the vehicle.D1 [0027]
Although D1 does not explicitly teach
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising responsive to the receipt of the TOF messages(conditional limitation no patentable weigh in method claims) from the quantity of the UWB anchors necessary for performing the trilateration for at least the plurality of consecutive ranging rounds, switching off the radar mode previously turned on to localize the mobile device.
But D1 teaches that not all the responders need to operate in Radar mode [0046]
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D1 in order to save computational power when time of flight data is available and radar is not needed for calculation.
8, 17. The method of claim 1, further comprising one or more of:
utilizing unused time slots within the ranging rounds for radar sessions in the ranging mode;D1 [0043](fig. 4, fig. 6 [0046-0047])
utilizing unused ranging rounds for the radar sessions; and/or
utilizing a combination of unused time slots within an existing ranging round and unused ranging rounds for the radar sessions.
9, 18. The method of claim 1, further comprising alternating between UWB radar sessions in the radar mode and UWB ranging sessions in the ranging mode in a time-synchronous manner to perform the trilateration.(fig. 4)
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the one or more UWB anchors is a single UWB anchor, and the position of the mobile device is determined based on the CIR data and using the TOF messages from only the single UWB anchor. D1: [0032]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELENA SERAYDARYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0706. The examiner can normally be reached on M-T, 7:30-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha Desai can be reached on (571)270-7792. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HELENA H SERAYDARYAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/TIMOTHY A BRAINARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights