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 .
Examiner’s Note: 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.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chehade, et. al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0254261, published August 11, 2022.
As per claims 1, 15, 29 and 30, Chehade discloses a sensing node, comprising:
one or more memories; one or more transceivers (Chehade, ¶24);
and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories and the one or more transceivers, the one or more processors, either alone or in combination (Chehade, Fig. 3), being configured to:
receive, via the one or more transceivers, from a sensing management component, a radar cross-section (RCS) request associated with one or more target objects; perform one or more sensing operations to derive RCS information associated with at least one target object; and transmit, via the one or more transceivers, to the sensing management component in response to the request, a RCS profile information report comprising the RCS information (Chehade, ¶49).
Chehade fails to explicitly disclose memories and transceivers. Chehade discloses processors and sensors to detect RCS and therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have memory and transceivers in order to gain the obvious benefit of proper operation of the equipment.
As per claims 2 and 16, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the RCS request comprises a sensing configuration associated with the one or more sensing operations (Chehade, ¶48).
As per claims 3 and 17, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 2, wherein the sensing configuration comprises: target object location information, or target object range information, or target object angle information, or target object Doppler information, or band information, or sense signal transmission power information, or any combination thereof (Chehade, ¶48 using current position).
As per claims 4 and 18, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the RCS information comprises: a single RCS value per target object, or a range of RCS values per target object, or RCS value distribution information, or frequency band information, or any combination thereof (Chehade, ¶49).
As per claims 5 and 19, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: transmit, via the one or more transceivers, to the sensing management component, a capability indication that indicates a capability of the sensing node associated with RCS profiling of target objects, wherein the request is based on the capability indication (Chehade, ¶49 where radar performance data is provided).
As per claims 6 and 20, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 5, wherein the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing management component, a RCS capability request, wherein the capability indication is transmitted to the sensing management component in response to the RCS capability request (Chehade, ¶49 providing radar capability).
As per claims 7 and 21, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the RCS profile information report comprises: an indication of a sensing mode associated with the RCS information, or at least one target identifier associated with the at least one target object, or a set of detected non-RCS target object sensing parameters associated with the at least one object, or any combination thereof (Chehade, ¶50).
Chehade does not provide this data within the RCS data stream however the information is provided.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide the data in the RCS stream, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by Chehade in providing the correct data.
As per claims 8 and 22, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the RCS request designates a target object type for RCS profiling, and wherein the RCS information is derived opportunistically by the sensing node based on the at least one target object matching the target object type (Chehade, ¶50).
As per claims 9 and 23, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: detect the target object type of the at least one target object via one or more non-radio frequency (RF) sensors; transmit, via the one or more transceivers, to the sensing management component, a sensing configuration request for sensing of the at least one target object in response to the detection; and receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing management component, the sensing configuration in response to the sensing configuration request, wherein the one or more sensing operations are performed based on the sensing configuration request (Chehade, ¶48).
As per claims 10 and 24, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the one or more sensing operations are performed before the RCS request is received (Chehade, ¶42 which is done before the API request).
As per claims 11 and 25, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 10, wherein the RCS request is a RCS profile availability request that requests information associated with stored RCS information at the sensing node, and wherein the RCS information transmitted to the sensing management component via the RCS profile information report comprises at least part of the stored RCS information (Chehade, ¶50 using stored database RCS data).
As per claims 12 and 26, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, transmit, via the one or more transceivers, to the sensing management component, a RCS profile availability indication that indicates that stored RCS information is available at the sensing node, wherein the RCS request is received in response to the RCS profile availability indication (Chehade, ¶50).
Chehade fails to explicitly disclose whether profile information is available. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide availability in order to gain the benefit of providing information if the database is offline and comparison cannot be done.
As per claims 13 and 27, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the sensing node corresponds to a user equipment or a wireless network component (Chehade, ¶36, user equipment).
As per claims 14 and 28, Chehade further discloses the sensing node of claim 1, wherein the sensing management component corresponds to a sensing server, a sensing management function (SnMF), a location management function (LMF), a location server, another UE, or a combination thereof (Chehade, ¶49, classifier and CMS units).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS E WINDRICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6417. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~7-3:30.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at 5712726878. 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.
/MARCUS E WINDRICH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights