DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The following claim(s) is/are pending in this office action: 1-20
The following claim(s) is/are amended: -
The following claim(s) is/are cancelled: -
The following claim(s) is/are new: -
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected. This rejection is FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 4/10/2026 is/are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the amendment filed 6/15/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below.
Applicant’s Invention as Claimed
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-11, 13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US Pub. 2021/0124945) in view of Bayesteh (US Pub. 2022/0155435).
With respect to Claim 1, Jones teaches a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) in communication with a wireless network, the method comprising: (Fig. 1, paras. 131-135, 139-145; tracking system for a store has a plurality of sensors including cameras, video cameras, LiDAR, etc. The devices are connected over a wireless network such as Bluetooth or WiFi. To the extent Bluetooth or Wifi transmission does not suggest a transmit/receive unit, see Bayesteh, para. 38, 48; WTRU.)
causing the WTRU to be configured for sensing a target object based on a first configuration; (para. 158; tracking system uses homography to translate pixels in frames to physical locations in space. Paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move. Multiple sensors may also be used to get different views of movement in order to keep people separately tracked. Therefore, the tracking of people is dependent upon the correct location of the sensor within the homography. See also Bayesteh, paras. 54-55; devices with sensing capabilities. Para. 63; base station transmits sensing configuration to the UE, which UE implements.)
detecting an occurrence of an event that comprises at least one of: a movement of the WTRU, a movement of the target object, or a change in a sensing capability of the WTRU; (para. 134; entry of a person into the space, which is a movement of an object. para. 223; tracking of person, which is a movement of an object. Para. 480; detecting weight changes to identify the event of an item being removed from a rack, which is a movement of an object. Para. 592-596, 600; detecting that the sensor has moved or rotated, which is a movement of the WTRU. Para. 143; each sensor has a limited view within space based on location and field of view, so a movement change is also a change in sensing capabilities. See also Bayesteh, Fig. 4, para. 55; movement of UE. para. 56-58; base station cannot sense a building due to a wall being in the way, so base station asks a user equipment to sense instead, which is a determination of sensing capability. Para. 62; UE transmits sensing capability report, which suggests the ability to determine current sensing capability.)
transmitting, to the wireless network, first information based on the detecting; (para. 150; servers process data and generate homographies. para. 593-597, 600; system receives a new x,y coordinate and rotation angle for the sensor position, which is first information. Para. 217-219, 225, 231; system keeps tracking list that keeps track of a person or object and is used to store data from multiple sensors and a digital cart associated with the person that includes items they have taken. Both of which are first information based on detecting.)
But Jones does not explicitly teach receiving a second configuration.
Bayesteh, however, does teach receiving, from the wireless network, second information indicative of a second configuration, wherein the second configuration is based on the first information; (paras. 69-70; after receiving a configuration command the UE may report additional capabilities such as mobility or direction of movement, which suggests a second configuration. Para. 62, 69, 72, 76, 80-82, 86; different sensing types, parameters, active/passive modes, tight synchronization commands, which suggests that the natural usage of the system will result in different configurations as different sensing requests are made and the system changes. See also Jones, para. 192; system recalibrates due to moved sensor. paras. 598-604; homography is updated due to movement of sensor. Paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move. Therefore, the movement of the sensor changes the homography and therefore the ranges by which the sensor will track the user, which is a second configuration.)
causing the WTRU to be configured for sensing the target object based on the second configuration; and causing the WTRU to perform sensing operations by causing the WTRU to be configured based on the second configuration to generate sensing information. (Para. 63; base station transmits sensing configuration to the UE, which UE implements. See also Jones, para. 192; system recalibrates due to moved sensor. paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to combine the method of Jones with the receipt of a second configuration in order to configure a device with a range of sensing capabilities to sense in the manner desired.
With respect to Claim 3, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, and Bayesteh also teaches wherein the first configuration is based on a distributed sensing task involving the WTRU and at least one other device. (para. 86; UE and BS work together to do sensing. paras. 94-97; sensing task that involves multiple UEs or multiple groups of UEs. See also Jones, paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to Claim 4, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 3, and Bayesteh also teaches wherein the at least one other device comprises any one or more of: a WTRU, a fuser node, a radio access network (RAN) node, or a base station. (para. 86; UE and BS work together to do sensing. paras. 94-97; sensing task that involves multiple UEs or multiple groups of UEs.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to Claim 7, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, and Jones also teaches wherein the first information further comprises a policy-triggered change based on at least one of: a location, a time of day, or a sensing profile associated with the sensing of the target object based on the first configuration. (paras. 144-148; weight sensor associated with particular items, which is a sensing profile associated with an object. Para. 231-238; location associated with particular items, which is a sensing profile associated with an object. Para. 26;7 text or symbols to identify item, which is a sensing profile associated with an object. See also Bayesteh, para. 68, 80; system may schedule sensing, which is a time of day profile.)
With respect to Claim 8, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, and Bayesteh also teaches wherein the second information comprises a fusion association configuration comprising at least one of: sensor data markings, fusion information related to the sensing of the target object, a type of sensor fusion to be performed, an indication of processing needed to process the sensing information, a node of the wireless network that performs sensor fusion, or a synchronization requirement. (Paras. 76, 87-90, 97-100; BS may order a tight synchronization request to ensure that two devices work in synchronization, which is association information. See also Jones, para. 218; adjacency lists for overlapping fields of view. See also Jones, paras. 153, 235, 270; system uses a combined visual sensor and weight sensor to determine that a particular person removed a particular item from the shelve.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to Claim 9, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, and Bayesteh also teaches wherein the sensing information comprises association information related to the sensing operations and based on the second configuration. (Para. 63; base station transmits sensing configuration to the UE, which UE implements. Paras. 76, 87-90, 97-100; BS may order a tight synchronization request to ensure that two devices work in synchronization, which is association information. See also Jones, para. 218; adjacency lists for overlapping fields of view.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to Claim 10, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, and Bayesteh also teaches wherein at least one of the first information or the second information comprises updated capabilities related to the sensing operations. (paras. 69-70; after receiving a configuration command the UE may report additional capabilities such as mobility or direction of movement. Direction of movement is a temporary characteristic that suggests updated information. Further, see Para. 62; UE transmits sensing capability report, which suggests the ability to determine current sensing capability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to update the capabilities when they have been detected to change in order to give the system an accurate ability to command sensing.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to Claim 11, it is substantially similar to Claim 1 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying. Further, Bayesteh also teaches the WTRU comprising a processor and a transceiver configured to: (Fig. 2, paras. 47-48; UE includes processor and transceiver.)
The same motivation to combine as Claim 1 applies here.
With respect to Claim 13, it is substantially similar to Claims 3 and 4 together, and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying.
With respect to Claims 16-19, they are substantially similar to Claims 7-10, respectively, and are rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying.
With respect to Claim 20, Jones teaches a method performed by a wireless network in communication with a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the method comprising: (Fig. 1, paras. 131-135, 139-145; tracking system for a store has a plurality of sensors including cameras, video cameras, LiDAR, etc. The devices are connected over a wireless network such as Bluetooth or WiFi. To the extent Bluetooth or Wifi transmission does not suggest a transmit/receive unit, see Bayesteh, para. 38, 48; WTRU.)
causing the WTRU to be configured for sensing a target object based on a first configuration; (para. 158; tracking system uses homography to translate pixels in frames to physical locations in space. Paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move. Multiple sensors may also be used to get different views of movement in order to keep people separately tracked. Therefore, the tracking of people is dependent upon the correct location of the sensor within the homography. See also Bayesteh, paras. 54-55; devices with sensing capabilities. Para. 63; base station transmits sensing configuration to the UE, which UE implements.)
receiving, from the WTRU, first information, (para. 150; servers process data and generate homographies. para. 593-597, 600; system receives a new x,y coordinate and rotation angle for the sensor position, which is first information. Para. 217-219, 225, 231; system keeps tracking list that keeps track of a person or object and is used to store data from multiple sensors and a digital cart associated with the person that includes items they have taken. Both of which are first information based on detecting.)
wherein the first information is based on a detection of an event that comprises at least one of: a movement of the WTRU, a movement of the target object, or a change in a sensing capability of the WTRU; (para. 134; entry of a person into the space, which is a movement of an object. para. 223; tracking of person, which is a movement of an object. Para. 480; detecting weight changes to identify the event of an item being removed from a rack, which is a movement of an object. Para. 592-596, 600; detecting that the sensor has moved or rotated, which is a movement of the WTRU. Para. 143; each sensor has a limited view within space based on location and field of view, so a movement change is also a change in sensing capabilities. See also Bayesteh, Fig. 4, para. 55; movement of UE. para. 56-58; base station cannot sense a building due to a wall being in the way, so base station asks a user equipment to sense instead, which is a determination of sensing capability. Para. 62; UE transmits sensing capability report, which suggests the ability to determine current sensing capability.)
But Jones does not explicitly teach transmitting a second configuration.
Bayesteh, however, does teach and transmitting, to the WTRU, second information indicative of a second configuration, wherein the second configuration is based on the first information, (paras. 69-70; after receiving a configuration command the UE may report additional capabilities such as mobility or direction of movement, which suggests a second configuration. Para. 62, 69, 72, 76, 80-82, 86; different sensing types, parameters, active/passive modes, tight synchronization commands, which suggests that the natural usage of the system will result in different configurations as different sensing requests are made and the system changes. See also Jones, para. 192; system recalibrates due to moved sensor. paras. 598-604; homography is updated due to movement of sensor. Paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move. Therefore, the movement of the sensor changes the homography and therefore the ranges by which the sensor will track the user, which is a second configuration.)
and the second configuration is used by the WTRU to configure the WTRU for sensing the target object. (Examiner notes this feature is intended use not subject to patentable weight. Regardless, see Bayesteh, para. 63; base station transmits sensing configuration to the UE, which UE implements. See also Jones, para. 192; system recalibrates due to moved sensor. paras. 152, 216-218, 223-226, 337-342; system tracks a person continuously throughout the store by using the homography to identify adjacent sensors and hand off the tracking of the person as they move.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to combine the method of Jones with the transmission of a second configuration in order to configure a device with a range of sensing capabilities to sense in the manner desired.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jones (US Pub. 2021/0124945) in view of Bayesteh (US Pub. 2022/0155435), and further in view of Wang (US Pub. 2023/025873).
With respect to Claim 2, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach prediction.
Wang, however, does teach wherein: the detecting of the occurrence of the event comprises forecasting that the event will occur; and the first information comprises an indication of when the forecasted event will occur. (paras. 36-38; system predicts movement of a human.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to combine the method of modified Jones with the prediction of movement in order to take actions prior to the movement actually causing problems. (Wang, paras. 39-41)
With respect to Claim 12, it is substantially similar to Claim 2 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying.
Claims 5-6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jones (US Pub. 2021/0124945) in view of Bayesteh (US Pub. 2022/0155435), and further in view of Liiv (US Pub. 2020/0250945).
With respect to Claim 5, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 3, but does not explicitly teach wherein transmitting the first information comprises: the transmitting of the first information to the at least one other device; and causing the at least one other device to transmit the first information to the wireless network
Liiv, however, does teach wherein transmitting the first information comprises: the transmitting of the first information to the at least one other device; and causing the at least one other device to transmit the first information to the wireless network. (Examiner asserts that this feature is obvious over Claim 1’s teaching, since one embodiment would simply be separating the sensors that determine the event from the WTRU, i.e. connecting a camera to a transceiver via a wire rather than integrally housing the camera with the transceiver. Making separable is an obvious act, see MPEP 2144. Regardless, Examiner will cite Liiv, Fig. 1, paras. 63, 66; detector network may be a multi-hop ad hoc network in which detectors may transmit to bridge which transmits to network access point. Detector 5 may only be reached through Detector 6.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to combine the method of modified Jones with the transmitting to another device to extend the range of the network by using multi-hop communication.
With respect to Claim 6, modified Jones teaches the method of claim 3, but does not explicitly teach wherein the detecting of the occurrence of the event comprises detecting a change in contextual information associated with the at least one other device, wherein the contextual information associated with the at least one other device comprises: a movement of the at least one other device or a change in a sensing capability of the at least one other device.
Liiv, however, does teach wherein the detecting of the occurrence of the event comprises detecting a change in contextual information associated with the at least one other device, wherein the contextual information associated with the at least one other device comprises: a movement of the at least one other device or a change in a sensing capability of the at least one other device. (paras. 63, 66; structure of an ad hoc network may change dynamically. For example, Detector 5 may change location and only be reachable through Detector 4 rather than Detector 6. Being able to communicate with a device over range-limited communication channels (see para. 65; WiFi, Bluetooth) is a movement context of another device. Further, because Liiv posits multi-hop communication, see para. 63, in order for Detector 5 to communicate to the access point it must inform Detector 6 of its capabilities (see Bayesteh, para. 62; device sends capability report) which is Detector 6 detecting a change in sensing capability of another device.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date to combine the method of modified Jones with the detection of other devices in order to allow the network to properly form and route sensing commands.
With respect to Claims 14-15, they are substantially similar to Claims 5-6, respectively, and are rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying.
Remarks
Applicant makes no amendment and stands on argument. Applicant argues at Remarks, pgs. 6-7 that Claim 1 is nonobvious because of “receiving…second information indicative of a second configuration, wherein the second configuration is based on the first information” and “causing the WTRU to be configured for sensing the target object based on the second configuration.”
The combination of references teaches the feature. Jones teaches a network of sensors that track a person continuously as they move throughout a store. The system relies upon a homography, a mapping based on the location of the devices. A sensor in Jones can determine it has moved, and can calculate a new position for the moved device. Therefore, Jones discloses an occurrence of an event comprising a movement of the WTRU and receiving first information (the offset/new x,y coordinate of the sensor) based on detecting that movement. The system updates the homography. Therefore, Jones is deficient (relative to these complained-of limitations) only in that the modifications made when a sensor is moved do not include network commands to reconfigure the moved sensor.
Bayesteh teaches a device capable of a plurality of configurations. Applicant seems to acknowledge this because Applicant states “Bayesteh merely discloses a single configuration being received by a UE.” Receiving configuration parameters at a minimum suggests that other configuration parameters could have been sent, i.e. that the device can be reconfigured. Further, Examiner notes that Bayesteh clearly teaches a device will perform multiple sensings, see, e.g., para. 68; scheduled sensings. To the extent that Applicant appears to argue that Bayesteh teaches only one, unchanging configuration for the sensing device over the lifetime of the device, Examiner disagrees with that interpretation of Bayesteh.
One obvious situation that arises is that because sensors have a limited field of view (Jones, para. 216) a movement of a sensor may create situations where there is an incomplete view of the store (paras. 143, 337). But Bayesteh teaches that sensors can be reconfigured with different sensing types and parameters, including parameters such as mobility (para. 70). Jones itself recognizes cameras may rotate (Jones, para. 600) so the movement of a sensor may suggest changing the rotation angle to keep coverage of an area. For example, if a sensor is moved further from an area it is meant to sense, one might reconfigure the sensor to not use bi-static sensing, since that is for clear-view, close-range sensing. (Bayesteh, para. 86) In short, Bayesteh teaches that devices can be given a plurality of sensing configurations, and Jones provides a motivation for giving different configurations because a device may change location which suggests sensing configuration should change.
Examiner finds the argument unpersuasive and maintains the rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS P CELANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1205. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on 571-272-7304. 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 the 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.
/NICHOLAS P CELANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights