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 .
This office action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 01/13/2025. Claims 12 – 28 are pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 12 – 14, 19 and 24 – 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20220201586 (Buyuksahin) (of record).
Regarding claim 12, Buyuksahin teaches “A method for a vehicle (paragraph 0047: The infrastructure 102 can be a car, a vehicle) and for controlling a connection between a user device and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) nodes of the vehicle (abstract), the method comprising:
establishing a first connection between a first BLE node of the vehicle and the user device (FIG 2 and paragraph 0065: the fob 204′ is shown in an initial position to the right-hand side of the infrastructure 202. At this position, the fob 204′ can establish a BLE connection with BLE node N 212 on the basis that the communication-quality-indicator for the connection with BLE node N 212 is the best, and therefore BLE node N 212 is identified as the current-BLE-node out of the plurality of BLE nodes.);
obtaining information on a position of the user device (paragraph 0070: the infrastructure-controller 206 can use additional or alternative information to identify the next-BLE-node from the plurality of BLE nodes. For example the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a relative-key-location, which represents the location of the key/fob 204 relative to the infrastructure 202. For instance, such a relative-key-location can be determined by performing ranging operations that involve the key/fob 204 exchanging ultra-wideband (UWB) signals with the infrastructure 202. Paragraph 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a key-node-distance for each of the plurality of BLE nodes, which represents the distance between the key 204 and the respective BLE node. The key-node-distance can be determined using ranging using UWB signalling.); and
causing the first connection to be terminated and a second connection between the user device and a second BLE node of the vehicle to be established based on the information on the position of the user device (paragraph 0070: The infrastructure-controller 206 can then identify one of the plurality of BLE nodes as the next-BLE-node based on the relative-key-location. For instance, the infrastructure-controller 206 can have access to BLE-node-locational-data that represents the position of each BLE node 208, 210, 212 on (or associated with) the infrastructure 202. Then, the infrastructure-controller 206 can select the most appropriate BLE node as the next-BLE-node based on the relative-key-location and the BLE-node-locational-data. Paragraph 0071: The infrastructure-controller 206 can then identify one of the plurality of BLE nodes as the next-BLE-node based on the key-node-distances. For example, the infrastructure-controller 206 can identify one of the plurality of BLE nodes as the next-BLE-node by selecting the BLE node that has the lowest key-node-distance. Paragraph 0054: The infrastructure-controller 106 can then deactivate the current-BLE-node N 112, for instance by sending an appropriate instruction to the current-BLE-node over the CAN bus 114. The infrastructure-controller 106 also activates the next-BLE-node 2 110 for continued communication with the key 104 using BLE signals.).”
Regarding claim 13, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein obtaining information on the position comprises determining the position of the user device from one or more ultra-wideband (UWB) measurements of at least one UWB node of the vehicle (paragraph 0070: a relative-key-location can be determined by performing ranging operations that involve the key/fob 204 exchanging ultra-wideband (UWB) signals with the infrastructure 202. Paragraph 0071: the key-node-distance can be determined using ranging using UWB signalling.).”
Regarding claim 14, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein the information on the position of the user device comprises information on a relative position of the user device to the first BLE node and the relative position of the user device to the second BLE node (paragraph 0070: the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a relative-key-location, which represents the location of the key/fob 204 relative to the infrastructure 202. Paragraph 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a key-node-distance for each of the plurality of BLE nodes, which represents the distance between the key 204 and the respective BLE node.), and wherein causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established comprises causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established (paragraphs 0070 – 0071) based on a comparison of the relative position of the user device to the first and relative position of the user device to the second BLE node (paragraph 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can identify one of the plurality of BLE nodes as the next-BLE-node by selecting the BLE node that has the lowest key-node-distance (representing “relative position of the user device to the [respective] BLE node”). Determining the lowest distance involves performing comparison of the distances between themselves).”
Regarding claim 19, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein the information on the relative position of the user device to the first and the second BLE node comprises information on a distance from the user device to the first BLE node and a distance from the user device to the second BLE node (Paragraph 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a key-node-distance for each of the plurality of BLE nodes, which represents the distance between the key 204 and the respective BLE node.), and wherein causing that the first connection is terminated and the second connection is established comprises causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established (paragraphs 0070 – 0071) based on a comparison of the distance from the user device to the first BLE node and the distance from the user device to the second BLE node (paragraph 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can identify one of the plurality of BLE nodes as the next-BLE-node by selecting the BLE node that has the lowest key-node-distance. Determining the lowest distance involves performing comparison of the distances between themselves).”
Regarding claim 24, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein the first connection serves for a communication session between the user device and the vehicle (FIG 2 and paragraph 0065: the fob 204′ is shown in an initial position to the right-hand side of the infrastructure 202. At this position, the fob 204′ can establish a BLE connection with BLE node N 212 on the basis that the communication-quality-indicator for the connection with BLE node N 212 is the best, and therefore BLE node N 212 is identified as the current-BLE-node out of the plurality of BLE nodes.), and wherein causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established comprises causing a handover of the communication session from the first BLE node to the second BLE node (paragraphs 0054 – 0055: The infrastructure-controller 106 can then deactivate the current-BLE-node N 112. The infrastructure-controller 106 also activates the next-BLE-node 2 110 for continued communication with the key 104 using BLE signals. The infrastructure 102 of FIG. 1 can achieve a hand-over from one BLE node 108, 110, 112 to another that is quick and seamless from the perspective of the key 104.).”
Regarding claim 25, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established comprises instructing the user device to control the handover or controlling the handover by the vehicle (paragraphs 0054 – 0055: The infrastructure-controller 106 can deactivate the current-BLE-node N 112. The infrastructure-controller 106 also activates the next-BLE-node 2 110 for continued communication with the key 104 using BLE signals. The infrastructure 102 of FIG. 1 can achieve a hand-over from one BLE node 108, 110, 112 to another that is quick and seamless from the perspective of the key 104. Thus, it is “controlling the handover by the vehicle”).”
Regarding claim 26, Buyuksahin teaches “A non-transitory computer readable medium having program code for performing the method of claim 12 when the program code is executed on a computer, a processor, or a programmable hardware component (paragraph 0091).”
Regarding claim 27, Buyuksahin teaches “An apparatus comprising: one or more interfaces for communication (paragraph 0059: BLE nodes 208, 210, 212 each representing “interface for communication”); and a data processing circuit configured to: control the one or more interfaces; and execute, using the one or more interfaces, the method of claim 12 (implemented as the infrastructure-controller (206) – see abstract).”
Regarding claim 28, Buyuksahin teaches “A vehicle comprising the apparatus of claim 27 (paragraph 0001 an infrastructure controller for an infrastructure such as a vehicle to which a user desires access).”
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.
Claims 20 – 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220201586 (Buyuksahin) as applied to claims 12 and 19 above, and further in view of US 20120327920 (XHAFA).
Regarding claims 20 and 22, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein causing the first connection to be terminated and the second connection to be established comprises terminating the first connection by the vehicle (paragraphs 0054 – 0055: The infrastructure-controller 106 can deactivate the current-BLE-node N 112 (“terminating the first connection by the vehicle”). The infrastructure-controller 106 also activates the next-BLE-node 2 110 for continued communication with the key 104 using BLE signals.)…”
Buyuksahin does not teach “transmitting an advertising signal of the second BLE node to the user device for the user device to establish the second connection in response to the advertising signal.”
XHAFA in paragraph 0022 teaches that in order to establish a connection, a first BLE device broadcasts advertising packets that are received and responded to by a second BLE device. In the BLE wireless protocol, two BLE-enabled devices are able to establish a connection between each other so that data and commands can be exchanged.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to utilize transmission of advertising packets to establish BLE connection, as disclosed by XHAFA, in the system of Buyuksahin. Doing so would have simply followed the BLE wireless protocol and allowed Buyuksahin’s key to establish BLE connection with the next-BLE-node.
Regarding claim 21, this claim is rejected because of the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 24 because they have similar limitations.
Regarding claim 23, this claim is rejected because of the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 13 because they have similar limitations.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220201586 (Buyuksahin) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of US 20180099643 (GOLSCH).
Regarding claim 15, Buyuksahin teaches “wherein obtaining information on the position of the user device comprises:
obtaining the relative position of the user device to the first BLE node from one or more UWB measurements …” “…obtaining the relative position of the user device to the second BLE node from one or more UWB measurements (paragraphs 0070 – 0071: the infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a relative-key-location, which represents the location of the key/fob 204 relative to the infrastructure 202 (which implicitly includes “the first BLE node” and “the second BLE node”). For instance, such a relative-key-location can be determined by performing ranging operations that involve the key/fob 204 exchanging ultra-wideband (UWB) signals with the infrastructure 202. The infrastructure-controller 206 can have access to BLE-node-locational-data that represents the position of each BLE node 208, 210, 212 on (or associated with) the infrastructure 202. The infrastructure-controller 206 can determine a key-node-distance for each of the plurality of BLE nodes, which represents the distance between the key 204 and the respective BLE node. The key-node-distance can be determined using ranging using UWB signalling.)…”
Buyuksahin does not disclose that the measurements are obtained “from a first UWB node incorporated in a first BLE/UWB combined node together with the first BLE node; and” “from a second UWB node incorporated in a second BLE/UWB combined node together with the second BLE node.”
GOLSCH teaches “a first UWB node incorporated in a first BLE/UWB combined node together with the first BLE node; and” “a second UWB node incorporated in a second BLE/UWB combined node together with the second BLE node (paragraph 0178: sensors 231 may be configured to communicate using impulse-radio (IR) UWB communication in addition to BLE communication. Paragraph 0188: a vehicle 230 that includes sensors 231 that communicate using BLE communication as well as IR UWB ranging communication. For example, in the configuration of the PEPS system 201 shown in FIG. 20, sensor 231A is a sensor capable of both IR UWB communication as well as BLE communication).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to utilize a combination of BLE and UWB devices in a single node, as disclosed by GOLSCH, in the system of Buyuksahin. Doing so would have allowed to reduce the number of individual devices spread around the vehicle by combining the BLE and UWB technologies in a single device.
Regarding claim 16, this claim is rejected because of the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 19 because they have similar limitations.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220201586 (Buyuksahin) in view of US 20180099643 (GOLSCH) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of US 20120327920 (XHAFA).
Regarding claim 17, this claim is rejected because of the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 20 because they have similar limitations.
Regarding claim 18, this claim is rejected because of the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 24 because they have similar limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GENNADIY TSVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3198. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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.
/GENNADIY TSVEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights