DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application as originally filed 01/13/2025.
Status of the Claim:
Claims 1-17 are cancelled.
New claims 18-37 are added.
Claims 18-37 are currently pending. The detail office action to the pending claims is as shown below.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s request for entry of the Preliminary Amendment filed on 02/12/2025, prior to examination of the instant application . By this amendment, the Claim has been amended by cancelling original claims 1-17 and adding new claims 18-37.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
New claim 18, in lines 5-6, recites “determining that sensing and the ranging are to be scheduled …”. It is respectfully suggested amending these lines as ““determining that the sensing and the ranging are to be scheduled …” to ensure clarity when referencing prior points or antecedents. Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 18-19, 22, 27-30, 33, 36, 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2025/0035770 to Pakrooh et al. (“Pakrooh”) in view of WO2023/198098 to Wu, Kuan et al. (“Wu”) (The remarks and/or references placed in the parentheses apply to the prior art)
RE claims 18 and 29, Pakrooh discloses a method by a first ultra-wideband (UWB) device (e.g. Fig. 12 of Pakrooh) and a first ultra-wideband (UWB)
Device (1300, 1400) for scheduling sensing and ranging in a UWB system (e.g. Title of Pakrooh: for performing UWB ranging and sensing), the method comprising: determining a block including a plurality of rounds (e.g. Pakrooh, Figs. 5, 9-11, paras [0066]-[0067]: determines at least a ranging and sensing block including a plurality of rounds), wherein each of the plurality of rounds includes a plurality of slots (e.g. Pakrooh, Fig. 5, paras [0066]-[0067]: wherein each of the plurality of rounds includes a plurality of slots); determining that sensing and the ranging are to be scheduled in a session (e.g. Pakrooh, Figs. 3, 4A-4C and paras [0057]-[0064, [0067]: in the ranging phase of the UWB session, a controller (initiator 330) defines a timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures with ranging/sensing rounds which may be exchanged between ERDEVs (e.g. an initiator and one or more responders) to initiate sensing and ranging in one UWB session or more UWB sessions, to which the responder may reply with a ranging/sensing response message); and transmitting, to at least one second UWB device, configuration information for scheduling the sensing and the ranging in the session, wherein the configuration information includes ranging control information and sensing control information (e.g. Pakrooh, Figs. 3, 5, 9, 12 and paras [0057]-[0061], [0067], [0092]: the controller (initiator 330) sends a control information to a receiving controlee (responder 340), wherein the control information includes parameters for the UWB ranging and sensing sessions to which the responder may reply with a ranging/sensing response message.)
While Pakrooh discloses transmitting, to the UWB responder device, configuration information for initiating UWB sensing and ranging, wherein the configuration information including ranging and sensing control information, as discussed above, the subject matter of claims 18 and 29 differ from Pakrooh in that Pakrooh does not expressly recite the language “scheduled” or “scheduling”, as recited by the claims. However, given the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, Pakrooh’s teaching of defining the timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures with ranging/sensing rounds which may be exchanged between the ERDEVs (e.g. an initiator and one or more responders) to initiate sensing and ranging in one UWB session or more UWB sessions and sending a ranging/sensing control message to which the responder may reply with ranging/sensing response message/s in one UWB session or more UWB sessions, as suggested or as taught by Pakrooh could be construed as Pakrooh does teach or fairly suggests the claimed language/s “scheduled” or “scheduling” as recited. Furthermore, the term “scheduling” in the context scheduling sensing and ranging in a field related to ultra-wideband (UWB) system is well known or rather well established. See for example, Wu (e.g. Abstract, para [0175]) which describe a wireless local area network systems related to sensing systems based on ultra-wideband ( UWB); generating an advanced ranging/sensing control information element to enable support of a UWB sensing and ranging functions and sending the control information including a management information element to configure (schedule) sensing/ ranging by a responding device based on scheduling mode. Hence the prior art includes each element/feature as claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Thus, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to modify the feature/element disclosed by Pakrooh with the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art given the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification or with Wu’s teaching or suggestion such that sensing and ranging can be scheduled in one or more sessions. Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art, such as an individual working in a field related to techniques associated with ultra-wideband (UWB)-based ranging and sensing could have combined the features/elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each feature/method merely performs the same function as it does separately, with each feature/method retaining its advantageous function, yielding predictable result/s. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claims 18 and 29.
RE claims 19 and 30, Pakrooh discloses the method of claim 18 and the first UWB device of claim 29, wherein a round of the plurality of rounds includes a sensing round, a ranging round, or a combination of the sensing round and the ranging round (e.g. Fig. 5, 9-11, para [0066] of Pakrooh; the plurality of rounds include one or more ranging rounds and/or sensing rounds.)
RE claims 22 and 33, Pakrooh discloses the method of claim 18 and the first UWB device of claim 29, wherein the configuration information is provided at a beginning of a sensing round in the plurality of rounds (e.g. Pakrooh, para [0066] and Figs. 3, 5. 7, 8-11 illustrate that the configuration information is provided at a beginning of a sensing/ranging round in the plurality of rounds. Note: although the information illustrated is called or labeled "ranging blocks”, they may be used for ranging and/or sensing sessions.)
RE claims 27 and 36, Pakrooh discloses the method of claim 18 and the first UWB device of claim 29, wherein the sensing round is a period for completing a sensing cycle involving a plurality of devices of the UWB system participating in a sensing exchange (e.g. Figs. 2-5, 9-11 and the corresponding paragraphs of Pakrooh illustrate/describe a plurality of devices of the UWB system participating in a sensing/ranging exchange, wherein the sensing/ranging round is a period for completing a sensing cycle involving the plurality of devices of the UWB system), and wherein the ranging round is a period for completing a range-measurement cycle involving the plurality of devices of the UWB system participating in a ranging exchange (e.g. Figs. 2-5, 9-11 and the corresponding paragraphs of Pakrooh illustrate/describe a plurality of devices of the UWB system participating in a sensing/ranging exchange, wherein the sensing/ranging round is a period for completing a sensing cycle involving the plurality of devices of the UWB system).
RE claims 28 and 37, Pakrooh discloses the method of claim 18 and the first UWB device of claim 29, wherein different sensing slots in the plurality of rounds are scheduled to different UWB devices (e.g. Figs. 2-5, 9-11 and the corresponding paragraphs of Pakrooh illustrate/describe different sensing slots in the plurality of rounds, wherein the different sensing slots in the plurality of rounds are initiated and send to different UWB devices).
Claims 20-21, 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2025/0035770 to Pakrooh et al. (“Pakrooh”) in view of WO2023/198098 to Wu, Kuan et al. (“Wu”) further in view of US 2025/0056627to Reddy et al. (“Reddy”) (The remarks and/or references placed in the parentheses apply to the prior art)
RE claims 20 and 31, Pakrooh in view of Wu discloses the method of claim 18 and the first UWB device of claim 29, wherein the configuration information indicates that the sensing and the ranging are scheduled by [interleaving] the ranging and the sensing in the plurality of slots of at least one round in the determined block (e.g. Pakrooh, Figs. 3, 4A-4C and paras [0057]-[0064, [0067]: the controller (initiator 330) defines a timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures with ranging/sensing rounds that may be exchanged between the initiator and the one or more responders to initiate (schedule) sensing and ranging in one or more UWB sessions; wherein the a timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures are generated using a deterministic random bit generator (DRBG) by scrambling the data bits in time), and wherein the plurality of slots include at least one sensing slot and at least one ranging slot (e.g. Pakrooh, Figs. 3, 5, 9, 12 and paras [0057]-[0061], [0067], [0092]: the controller (initiator 330) sends a control information to a receiving controlee (responder 340), wherein the control information includes parameters for the UWB ranging and sensing sessions to which the responder may reply with a ranging/sensing response message.)
While Pakrooh in view of Wu discloses wherein the configuration information indicates that the sensing and the ranging are scheduled by scrambling the ranging and the sensing in the plurality of slots of at least one round in the determined block, as discussed above, the subject matter of claims 20 and 31 differ from Pakrooh in view of Wu in that Pakrooh in view of Wu does not expressly recite the term “interleaving” as recited by the claims. However, given the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, Pakrooh in view of Wu teaching of the controller (initiator 330) defines a timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures with ranging/sensing rounds that may be exchanged between the initiator and the one or more responders to initiate (schedule) sensing and ranging in one or more UWB sessions; wherein the a timestamp sequences (STS) and time structures are generated using a deterministic random bit generator (DRBG) by scrambling (i.e. interleaving the data bits in time), as suggested or as taught by Pakrooh in view of Wu could be construed as Pakrooh in view of Wu does teach or fairly suggests the claimed language/s “interleaving” or “by interleaving” as recited. Furthermore, said term/language in the context of scheduling sensing and ranging sessions in a field related to ultra-wideband (UWB) system is well known or rather well established. See for example, Reddy (e.g. paras [0018], [0079)-[0080], [0099] and Fig. 13) which describe/illustrate timing diagram and how the timestamp sequences of the UWB sessions may be interleaved. Hence the prior art includes each element/feature as claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Thus, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to modify the feature/element disclosed by Pakrooh in view of Wu with the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art given the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification or with Reddy’s teaching or suggestion to help mitigate collisions overlapping in different concurrent UWB sessions. Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art, such as an individual working in a field related to techniques associated with ultra-wideband (UWB)-based ranging and sensing could have combined the features/elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each feature/method merely performs the same function as it does separately, with each feature/method retaining its advantageous function, yielding predictable result/s. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claims 20 and 31.
RE claims 21 and 32, Pakrooh discloses the method of claim 20 and the first UWB device of claim 31, wherein the at least one round includes at least one of: a one-to-one ranging session, a one-to-one sensing session, a one-to-many ranging or sensing session, a one-to-many ranging and sensing session, a many-to-many ranging or sensing session or a many-to-many ranging and sensing session (e.g. Each of Figs 5, 9-11 of Pakrooh illustrate wherein the at least one round includes at least one of: a one-to-one ranging session and a one-to-many ranging or sensing session. Also, para [0066] of Pakrooh notes - although the information illustrated is called or labeled "ranging block”, they may be used for ranging and/or sensing sessions)
Objected but Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-26 and 34-35 are objected to as being directly dependent upon rejected base claims but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of their respective base claims and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are (See the attached Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)). These prior arts are considered pertinent because they relate generally to wireless communication, more specifically to techniques associated with ultra-wideband (UWB)-based ranging and sensing communications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERHANU TADESE whose telephone number is (571)272-2478. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9 - 5 PM EST).
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 M. Fan can be reached on 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.
/BERHANU TADESE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights