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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1: claims 1-5 and 20 in the reply filed on 06/11/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-5 and 20-29 are pending in the application. Claims 21-29 have been added and claims 6-19 have been canceled.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 12/23/2024 are acknowledged and are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
It is not clear if the term “comprising” in first line of claim 1 is related to the “apparatus” or to the “reader device”. For examination purposes, it is assumed that the “reader device” comprises the subsequent features of claim 1.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Appropriate correction or clarification is requested.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 20, 22-25, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,496,937; hereinafter as, “Wang”) in view of Roesner (U.S. Publication No. 2010/0289623).
As per claim 1, Wang teaches an apparatus (Fig. 2: 240) for wireless communication at a reader device (110), the reader device comprising:
one or more memories (220); and
one or more processors (210), coupled to the one or more memories (220), configured to cause the reader device to:
communicate with one or more first radio frequency identification (RFID) tags (see col. 6, line 34: 240 contains an RFID interface, which is typically used for communicating with RFID tags), during at least part of a first time period (e.g., col. 8, line 27: particular time interval), using a first antenna (Fig. 3: 301) of the reader device (110); and
communicate with one or more second RFID tags (see col. 6, line 34: 240 contains an RFID interface, which is typically used for communicating with RFID tags), during at least part of a second time period (implicit: after switching antennas a new time period starts), using a second antenna (Fig. 3: 302) of the reader device (110),
wherein the second antenna (302) is selected over the first antenna (301) based upon at least one switching metric associated with the first time period (see e.g., col. 8, lines 24-27: “Transmit antenna manager 400 may manage which antenna (e.g., antenna 301 or antenna 302) is selected as the transmitting antenna based on metrics determined during a particular time interval.”).
Wang does not explicitly describe a communication with RFID tags; however, it is known in the art that the RFID interface comprised by communication interface 240 is used for communication with RFID tags.
For example, in the same field of interrogating RF identification (RFID) tags, Roesner teaches: a reader device to communicate with one or more first/second radio frequency identification (RFID) tags (see e.g., Fig. 1; para. [0011]: “The RFID tags 104 are communicatively coupled to an RFID reader 106 through an inhibited zone 106 or a target zone 108 using antennas 110 a or 110 b connected to a reader 112. The system 100 may include more or less than two antennas (e.g., 4, 6) to communicate with the tags 104…the reader 112 may selectively switch between the antennas 110 a and 110 b. During a first time period, the reader 112 may transmit commands to the inhibited zone 106 using the antenna 110 b to maintain or switch those tags 104 to an idle state. During a second time period, the reader 112 may interrogate tags 104 in the target zone 108 for information associated with the responding tags 104.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the known RFID-tag communication techniques of Roesner in the apparatus of Wang to enable RFID tag reading and obtain the known benefits of RFID identification/tracking.
As per claim 3, claim 1 is incorporated and Wang in view of Roesner further teaches: wherein the first time period is extended in response to an ongoing RFID operation or a temporary stop of an RFID operation (obvious, that an ongoing operation should not be interrupted).
As per claim 4, claim 1 is incorporated and Wang in view of Roesner further teaches: wherein the at least one switching metric comprises one or more of: an expected quantity of RFID tags; a metric associated with a different radio of the reader device; a tune-away pattern associated with the different radio; or a signal strength measurement (see Wang, e.g., col. 3, lines 11-16: “In some implementations, the metric may include a down link metric. For example, a downlink metric may include a downlink Reference Signal Receive Power (RSRP) measurement, a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) measurement, a downlink pathloss measurement, an error rate measurement, and/or another type of downlink metric.”).
As per claim 5, claim 4 is incorporated and Wang in view of Roesner further teaches: wherein the different radio comprises a wide area network (WAN) radio, a wireless local area network (WLAN) radio, a Bluetooth radio, an ultra-wideband (UWB) radio, or a global network satellite system (GNSS) radio (see Wang, e.g., col. 5, line 22 & col. 6, line 33).
Method claims 20 and 22-24 are drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 1 and 3-5. Therefore, method claims 20 and 22-24 correspond to apparatus claims 1 and 3-5 and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 25 and 27-29 are drawn to computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions executed by one or more processors using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 1 and 3-5. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 25 and 27-29 correspond to apparatus claims 1 and 3-5 and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Claims 2, 21, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Roesner, and further in view of Calzolari et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0412417; hereinafter as, “Calzolari”).
As per claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Wang in view of Roesner does not explicitly teach: wherein the first time period and the second time period are based at least in part on a periodicity associated with antenna switching.
However, in the same field of wireless communications, Calzolari teaches: wherein the first time period and the second time period are based at least in part on a periodicity associated with antenna switching (see e.g., para. [0054]: “UE 115-a may periodically determine whether to switch an operating antenna 215. For example, UE 115-a may determine whether to perform an antenna switching test every 640 milliseconds (ms). The determination may be based on the current communication measurement for that periodic time period.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the known periodic antenna switching technique of Calzolari in the apparatus of Wang in view of Roesner to enable selecting an optimal antenna for each time period.
Method claim 21 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 2. Therefore, method claim 21 corresponds to apparatus claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Non-transitory computer-readable medium claim 26 is drawn to computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions executed by one or more processors using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 2. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable medium claim 26 corresponds to apparatus claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Armstrong et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2002/0063622) discloses an RFID system and method for communicating between a host computer, one or more interrogators connected to the host computer, and a large body of transponders distributed within an area covered by the interrogators. Each interrogator includes an antenna system utilizing a switch matrix to connect multiple antennas having different polarizations.
Aiouaz et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,120,494) discloses RFID readers, reader systems, and methods that utilize smart antenna switching.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADNAN AZIZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7536, (Fax: 571-270-8536). The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9am - 6pm Eastern Time).
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, QUAN-ZHEN WANG can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ADNAN AZIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 adnan.aziz@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights