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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 2-4-2025, 10-3-2025, 10-29-2025 and 5-4-2026 are being considered by the examiner.
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, 2, 5-16 and 19-30 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waheed, et. al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0066019, published March 3, 2022.
As per claims 1, 15, 29 and 30, Waheed discloses a ranging method, comprising: sending, by a first device, a first measurement frame to a second device on a first frequency; receiving, by the first device on the first frequency, a second measurement frame sent by the second device; sending, by the first device, a third measurement frame to the second device on a second frequency; receiving, by the first device on the second frequency, a fourth measurement frame sent by the second device, wherein the second frequency is different from the first frequency; obtaining, by the first device, a first measurement result based on the second measurement frame (Waheed, Fig. 2);
obtaining, by the first device, a third measurement result based on the fourth measurement frame; and sending, by the first device, the first measurement result and the third measurement result to a third device, wherein the first measurement result and the third measurement result are used for ranging (Waheed, ¶23).
Waheed fails to disclose a third device used for ranging, instead providing the ranging determination on the devices. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use a third device, 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 Waheed in providing the ranging determination.
Examiner’s Note: Claim 15 is rejected as per claim 1 as the method steps are the same and “fourth” device is used in place of the “third”.
As per claims 2 and 16, Waheed discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first frequency and the second frequency are adjacent frequencies in a time order of use, the first frequency belongs to a first frequency set, the second frequency belongs to a second frequency set, and the first frequency set comprises the first frequency and the second frequency set (Waheed, ¶23).
As per claims 5 and 19, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first measurement result comprises phase information or in-phase component and quadrature component (IQ) information of a single-frequency sine wave signal comprised in the second measurement frame at a first moment, or phase information or IQ information, at the first moment, of a signal obtained by extending the single-frequency sine wave signal comprised in the second measurement frame according to a single-frequency sine wave model (Waheed, ¶21 and Fig. 2 showing the sin wave).
As per claims 6 and 20, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the first device, a first timing offset, wherein the first timing offset represents a timing offset of the first device relative to the second measurement frame; and determining, by the first device, the first moment based on the first timing offset (Waheed, ¶21 deltaT).
As per claims 7 and 21, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the first moment satisfies Ti1=tO+t 1/2, wherein tO represents a reference moment, tl1 represents the first timing offset, and Ti represents the first moment (Waheed, ¶21).
While Waheed fails to use the same equation, it is well within the skill of a person in the art to determine what equation to use given the operating parameters of the apparatus.
As per claims 8 and 22, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the determining a first timing offset comprises: determining, by the first device, the first timing offset by measuring a signal in the second measurement frame (Waheed, ¶21).
As per claims 9 and 23, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: receiving or sending, by the first device, a first message, wherein the first message indicates the reference moment, or the reference moment is a preconfigured or predefined moment (Waheed, ¶20, calibration).
As per claims 10 and 24, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: receiving or sending, by the first device, a second message, wherein the second message indicates a reference value, or the reference value is a preconfigured or predefined value; and determining the reference moment based on the reference value and a first frequency offset, wherein the first frequency offset represents a frequency offset of the first device relative to the second measurement frame (Waheed, ¶20-22).
As per claims 11 and 25, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein a single-frequency sine wave signal comprised in the first measurement frame comprises at least two symbols, each of the at least two symbols is obtained through modulation based on a first sequence by using a first constellation diagram, the first sequence is a sequence comprising N bits, and a value of N corresponds to a modulation scheme of the first constellation diagram (Waheed, ¶19 using various modulation schemes).
As per claims 12 and 26, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 11, wherein a first symbol is obtained through modulation based on the first sequence by using the first constellation diagram; and the first symbol comprises at least one of a symbol that is located before and adjacent to the single-frequency sine wave signal and that is in the first measurement frame, or a first symbol that is located after the single-frequency sine wave signal and that is in the first measurement frame (Waheed, ¶19).
As per claims 13 and 27, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein a single-frequency sine wave signal comprised in the first measurement frame comprises at least two symbols, and each of the at least two symbols is obtained through Gaussian frequency-shift keying (GFSK} modulation based on a first bit; and a second symbol is obtained through GFSK modulation based on the first bit, and the second symbol comprises at least one of a symbol that is located before and adjacent to the single- frequency sine wave signal and that is in the first measurement frame, or a first symbol that is located after the single-frequency sine wave signal and that is in the first measurement frame (Waheed, ¶55 and ¶58-59 using GFSK for modulation symbols).
As per claims 14 and 28, Waheed further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the first device, a ranging result, wherein the ranging result comprises information about a distance between the first device and the second device (Waheed, ¶23).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waheed in view of Shahar-Doron, et. al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2020/0319329, published October 8, 2020.
As per claims 3, 4, 17 and 18, Waheed discloses the method of claim 1 including first and second frequencies but fails to disclose setting the frequency in a pseudo-random manner and providing the seeds.
Shahar-Doron teaches use of pseudo-random code via seeding (¶52).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use pseudo-random determination, 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 Waheed.
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