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 filed on 12/30/2024 and 4/22/2025 have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 12/30/2024 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1, 4-9, 12, 15, 16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Troutman (US-2021/0190940).
Regarding claim 1, Troutman teaches a method comprising:
transmitting, by a computing device (Fig. 1 [10 & 16]), an Ultra Wideband (UWB) signal comprising pulses to a Backscatter Device (BKD); (Fig. 1 [14] and Page 2 [0023-0024] “The RF transceiver devices (10) may be of the type designed to track active RF tags and emit UWB pulses of the same type as used for tracking of active RF tags” and “the RF transceiver devices (10) transmit data packets comprised of UWB RF pulses that reflect off of objects in accordance to the objects' radar cross section.”)
receiving a reflection of the UWB signal from the BKD in response to the UWB signal; (Page 2 [0024] “The RF transceiver devices (10) operate in pairs with one of the pair acting as an emitter of a data packet and the other of the pair acting as a receiver. The reflected pulses are received and recorded by the receiving device as channel impulse response (CIR) data (FIGS. 3 and 4)”) and
locating the BKD using a Channel Impulse Response (CIR) of the reflection of the UWB signal. (Page 2 [0024] “The channel impulse response data provides a measurement of the CIR resulting from the pulses transmitted by the other of the RF transceiver device pair. As explained in further detail below, the CIR data is recorded and then transmitted by the RF transceiver device (10) to a computing device (16) (e.g., a server), which implements a tracking algorithm and/or a radar imaging algorithm to identify, track or classify the passive object or to generate a radar image of the passive object.”, Pages 2-3 [0026] “The CIR data is transmitted from the receiving transceiver (10) to a computing device (16) which utilizes the CIR data from each of the RF transceiver devices over time to track the passive object (14) and/or form a radar image of the passive object. A preamble signal code contained in a series UWB pulses is used identify CIR data from reflected pulses, determine the time taken for reflected pulses to reach the transceiver, and calculate the distance from an emitting transceiver to a reflecting object and to the receiving transceiver, a path referred to as a ray.” and Page 5 [0043] “Changes in the channel impulse responses captured at successive moments in time may be used to track the movement of passive objects in the monitored area (12).”)
Regarding claim 4, Troutman teaches determining a Time-of-Flight (ToF) of the reflection of the UWB signal. (Page 1 [0004] and Pages 5-6 Claim 1)
Regarding claim 5, Troutman teaches wherein determining the ToF of the reflection of the UWB signal comprises determining a difference between a time when the UWB signal is received at a receive antenna and when the reflection of the UWB signal from the BKD is received at the receive antenna. (Pages 5-6 Claim 1 “the computing device (16) comprises coded instructions directing the computing device to receive the CIR data transferred from each second UWB transceiver (10) and process said CIR by using a time delay between the time of flight of preamble code received by direct line of sight and the time of flight of a reflected preamble code to locate and/or track the position of the passive object (14)”)
Regarding claim 6, Troutman teaches locating another BKD using another receive antenna. (Page 4 [0039] “The number of reflections may be greater or fewer than the number shown in the figure, depending on the environment within the monitored area (12). A number of passive objects may be detected, tracked, and/or mapped on a radar image.”)
Regarding claim 7, Troutman teaches wherein the computing device comprises a Wi-Fi access point. (Page 3 [0030] “The network interface may communicate with the computing device through any known wireless technology (any interface that communicates in accordance with IEEE 802.11 standards, such as WiFi, 3G, L TE, IoT, Bluetooth®, and/or the like)”)
Regarding claim 8, Troutman teaches a method comprising:
transmitting, by a computing device (Fig. 1 [10 & 16]), an Ultra Wideband (UWB) signal comprising pulses to a Backscatter Device (BKD); (Fig. 1 [14] and Page 2 [0023-0024] “The RF transceiver devices (10) may be of the type designed to track active RF tags and emit UWB pulses of the same type as used for tracking of active RF tags” and “the RF transceiver devices (10) transmit data packets comprised of UWB RF pulses that reflect off of objects in accordance to the objects' radar cross section.”)
receiving a reflection of the UWB signal from the BKD in response to the UWB signal; (Page 2 [0024] “The RF transceiver devices (10) operate in pairs with one of the pair acting as an emitter of a data packet and the other of the pair acting as a receiver. The reflected pulses are received and recorded by the receiving device as channel impulse response (CIR) data (FIGS. 3 and 4)”)
determining at least one of a plurality of characteristics of the BKD using a Channel Impulse Response (CIR) of the reflection of the UWB signal; (Page 2 [0024] “the CIR data is recorded and then transmitted by the RF transceiver device (10) to a computing device (16) (e.g., a server), which implements a tracking algorithm and/or a radar imaging algorithm to identify, track or classify the passive object or to generate a radar image of the passive object.” and Page 5 [0043] “Changes in the channel impulse responses captured at successive moments in time may be used to track the movement of passive objects in the monitored area (12). Moving objects result in a distribution of CIR data peak amplitude over time.”) and
determining an identity of the BKD based on the at least one of the plurality of characteristics. (Page 5 [0043] “Moving objects result in a distribution of CIR data peak amplitude over time. In a method for tracking a passive object, it may be desired to employ a computational algorithm that screens out static objects, which result in CIR data peaks that remain constant over time. Eliminating these peaks from further processing simplifies the tracking moving objects.” and Page 2 [0024] “the CIR data is recorded and then transmitted by the RF transceiver device (10) to a computing device (16) (e.g., a server), which implements a tracking algorithm and/or a radar imaging algorithm to identify, track or classify the passive object or to generate a radar image of the passive object.”)
Regarding claim 9, Troutman teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises encoded types. (Pages 2-3 [0026] “A preamble signal code contained in a series UWB pulses is used identify CIR data from reflected pulses, determine the time taken for reflected pulses to reach the transceiver, and calculate the distance from an emitting transceiver to a reflecting object and to the receiving transceiver, a path referred to as a ray” and Page 3 [0033])
Regarding claim 12, Troutman teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises response time. (Page 3 [0032] “For example, to track passive objects (14), the computing device (16) may detect perturbations in the channel impulse responses that appear at a time delay that corresponds with a distance indicated by the time delay.”)
Regarding claim 15, Troutman teaches spatially mapping the BKD device based on the identity. (Page 2 [0024] “which implements a tracking algorithm and/or a radar imaging algorithm to identify, track or classify the passive object or to generate a radar image of the passive object.” and Page 5 [0044] “The voxels having the most accumulated perturbations are identified as containing a passive object (14). The 3D map showing the position of the passive object (14) may be displayed on a display (18).”)
Regarding claim 16, the limitations of claim 16 are rejected as being the same reasons set forth above in claim 1. See additional structure processing unit/memory in Page 3 [0034].
Regarding claims 19 and 20, the limitations of claims 19 and 20 are rejected as being the same reasons set forth above in claims 4 and 5.
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.
Claims 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Jantunen et al. (US-2011/0274141 hereinafter, Jantunen).
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Troutman teaches the limitations of claim 1 and 16 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting toggling the BKD to transmit by varying a pulse repetition rate of the UWB signal to charge the BKD.
In an analogous art, Jantunen teaches a method and system for pulsed wireless communication via UWB RF communication (Page 1 [0002]) that includes toggling the BKD to transmit (Page 3 [0035] “The quench signal duration can be varied to adjust the time delay between the transmission pulse signal and the reflection signal. This enables detection of the reflection signal at the reader to be optimized”) by varying a pulse repetition rate of the UWB signal to charge the BKD. (Page 3 [0033] “ The active reception period of the second transceiver can thus be controlled by the quench signal waveform. For example, parameters such as the pulse width, period, amplitude, slope etc may be used to control the pulse detection process”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Troutman after modifying it to incorporate the ability to utilize a varying repetition rate for a quench signal to build up the stored power in a super-regenerative oscillator in order to control the reflection signal for optimal reception of Jantunen since it enables detection time to be controlled and provides a flexible system that can be adjusted based on the needs of the application. (Jantunen Page 3 [0034-0036])
Claims 3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Jantunen as applied to claims 2 and 17 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (US-2025/0096841 hereinafter, Wu).
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Troutman in view of Jantunen teaches the limitations of claims 2 and 17 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting determining a power dissipation of the BKD per pulse of the UWB signal.
In an analogous art, Wu teaches an ultra-wideband based communication system (Abstract) that includes determining a power dissipation of the BKD per pulse of the UWB signal. (Page 13 [0188] “ the responder roughly estimates, based on power strength of the NB signal received from the initiator”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Troutman in view of Jantunen after modifying it to incorporate the ability to determine the power of the signal of Wu since it enables determining the quality of the wireless environment and accordingly, whether the wireless environment enables high precision ranging or low precision ranging. (Wu Page 1 [0004])
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Chrabieh (US-12,468,003).
Regarding claim 10, Troutman teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises sidelobe levels.
In an analogous art, Chrabieh teaches a method for estimating time of arrival of wireless signals (Abstract) that includes using the channel impulse response to determine sidelobe levels (Col. 6 lines 50-67) in order to properly identify the first signal path (Col. 11 lines 12-16) to have an accurate time of arrival. (Col. 7 lines 27-32, see additionally claims 1-3)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to substitute the ability to determine sidelobe levels of Chrabieh with the ability to determine characteristics of Troutman and the results of the substitution would have been predictable; the ability to accurately determine signal time of arrival for distance measurements in multipath environments. (Chrabieh Col. 1 lines 28-49) One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it enables an additional way to verify distance tracking, thereby increasing options to track/verify the distance to the backscatter device.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Maharbiz et al. (WO-2024/215509-A2, hereinafter, Maharbiz).
Regarding claim 11, Troutman teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises a phase delay profile.
In an analogous art, Maharbiz teaches a method and system for interrogating a plurality of backscatter devices via pulsed transmissions (Abstract) that includes determining characteristics of the backscatter device by determining phase delays. (Pages 4-5 [0013-0014] “the interrogator device is further configured to track a position over time of at least a first one of the plurality of backscatter node devices relative to the at least one interrogator device. In certain aspects, the interrogator device is configured to track the position over time based on a change in time of flight between interrogator pulse signals and received individual backscatter signals for the first backscatter node device. For example, in certain aspects, the method of calculating a change in time of flight may include an averaged change over pulses of the tracked times of zero-crossings of the backscatter waveform, or a weighted-average of the change over pulses of the instantaneous phase offset between the backscatter waveform and a reference sinusoid.” and Page 17 [0070] “To track the average phase-change-across-pulses of the whole region of backscatter from the sensor, the instantaneous phase may be unwrapped, then differentiated across successive pulses, then weighted-averaged over the ROI, then integrated across pulses. This phase tracking may be converted to an estimate of distance tracking with a known backscatter sampling rate and an assumed speed of wave propagation in the wireless medium.”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to substitute the ability to collect and analyze phase delay profiles of the backscatter signals of Maharbiz with the ability to determine characteristics of Troutman and the results of the substitution would have been predictable; the ability to estimate the distance to the backscatter device. (Maharbiz Page 17 [0070]) One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it enables an additional way to verify distance tracking, thereby increasing options to track/verify the distance to the backscatter device.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Hauske (DE-10-2022-115717 A1 published on 12/28/2023).
Regarding claim 13, Troutman teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises reflective properties identified from the CIR.
In analogous art, Hauske teaches a method and system for distance measurement (Abstract) that includes utilizing the channel impulse response to detect and track highly reflective objects. (Paragraph spanning Pages 8-9 of provided translation “Continuous, digital measurement of the channel impulse response in the receiver is possible without any time gaps” and “Continuous processing (error compensation, noise and interference suppression, etc.) and interpretation of channel properties is possible, such as detection of highly reflective objects such as polished metals (other vehicles), detection of rain, fog or dust (attenuation), a detection of moist surfaces and/or glass (polarization), a detection of time-dependent phase and/or transit time changes (movement of objects), etc.”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to substitute the ability to use the channel impulse response to determine objects as being highly reflective or causing high levels of attenuation of Hauske with the ability to determine characteristics of Troutman and the results of the substitution would have been predictable; the ability to identify backscatter devices by comparing the results with known references. (Hauske Page 9 “A comparison of the channel properties with known references is possible for identification purposes (e.g. learned or learning system)”) One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it enables an additional way to identify the backscatter device, thereby increasing options to track/verify the identity of the backscatter device.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Fischer et al. (US-2016/0285611 hereinafter, Fischer)
Regarding claim 14, Troutman teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the at least one of the plurality of characteristics comprises transmission repetition rates.
In an analogous art, Fischer teaches a radar detector for use in detecting and overcoming signals in a frequency band (Abstract) that includes detecting characteristics from the channel impulse response that includes the rate of pulse repetition intervals. (Page 21 [0272] “the detection process can be based on one or more values that represent characteristics or features or combinations thereof of the victim transmitter 2023, such as the pulse amplitude, timing, repeat rate of pulse repetition interval, channel impulse response from the transmission, difference in channel impulse response between different polarizations which would be used to indicate a property of the RF channel that is between the victim 2023 and the victim-signal detector 2022 (and also to estimate the channel between the victim 2023 and the radio 2021).”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to substitute the ability to use the channel impulse response to determine the repeat rate of pulse repetition intervals of Fischer with the ability to determine characteristics of Troutman and the results of the substitution would have been predictable; the ability to use the detection of the identity to perform other tasks. (Fischer Page 21 [0272]) One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it enables an additional way to identify the backscatter device, thereby increasing options to track/verify the identity of the backscatter device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-2026/0075564 to Lorca Hernando et al. which discloses detecting and utilizing sidelobe levels to resolve ambiguity in resolving WTRU position.
US-2024/0129018 to Barbu et al. which discloses determining parameters of a backscatter device from parameters detected in the backscatter signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW C SAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8099. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at (571)272-4177. 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.
/Matthew C Sams/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights