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 .
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 8-9, 11, 13, 15, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollar et al. (US 20210304577 A1) in view of Werner et al. (US 20200179760 A1).
Concerning claims 1 and 11, Hollar et al. (hereinafter Hollar) teaches a method comprising:
receiving data from sensors deployed in an environment at a computing system (fig. 3; ¶¶0063-0065: processing unit 107 receives RF signals and image data from ultra-wide band (UWB) location devices and cameras, respectively; ¶0070: a facility includes UWB location devices, cameras and UWB/camera devices), the sensors including radio beacons and depth-cameras and the data including beacon data and camera data (¶0070: the facility includes UWB location devices (radio beacons, see ¶0064) and cameras that can extract depth from objects within an image (see ¶0059; ¶0104; ¶¶0118-0119)), wherein the radio beacons and the depth-cameras are separately positioned within the environment (¶0070: The environment comprises radio beacons and cameras that are positioned separately within the environment, see fig. 3: cameras 302 & 304 and radio beacons 303 & 305. Furthermore, Hollar specifies that “…in some embodiments, there may only be Camera and UWB devices and no Camera/UWB devices…”. );
pairing a depth camera and a radio beacon when a first (x,y) coordinate identified by beacon data from the depth camera is identical to a second (x,y) coordinate identified by camera data from the radio beacon (¶0067: “…the object can be located using a combination of UWB measurements and camera sensor data”; fig. 8 & ¶¶0095-0096: “…the UWB RTLS solution (i.e., the radio beacon) tracks the UWB tags and associates the tags' location with the field of view of the camera sensor when available”; fig. 15 D: intersection 1507);
building histories from the data, the histories including positions of anonymous users in the environment and positions of devices in the environment, wherein combined routes of the anonymous users are generated based on paired data between the beacon data and the camera data (¶¶0055-0056: the tracking technologies of the camera based systems and ultra-wideband (UWB) systems are combined; ¶0120: using the combined UWB/Camera real-time tracking (RTLS) network the system can develop a history of the person's movement and location; ¶0128: Shopping Mall application using historical user patterns based on movement analytics; ¶0132: using movement and location history as part of quality control in a manufacturing process; ¶0121: visual attributes other than facial parameters (e.g., color, shape, size of the clothing) may be used in associating a user with data. This the identity of the user may remain anonymous);
building a user profile for each of the anonymous users based on the histories (¶0120: developing a history of the person's movement and location; ¶0125: building a history of a specific user), and
wherein facial information is neither captured nor retained for each anonymous user (¶0121: visual attributes other than facial parameters (e.g., color, shape, size of the clothing) may be used in associating a user with data). Hollar further teaches using the history of a user (i.e., a profile) to adjust the behavior of a system towards the user (¶0127-¶0136) but fails to explicitly teach generating personalized recommendations for each of the anonymous users based on corresponding user profiles, wherein the personalized recommendations are delivered to devices associated with the corresponding anonymous users.
Werner et al. (hereinafter Werner), in the same field of endeavor, teaches generating personalized recommendations for each of the users based on corresponding user profiles, wherein the personalized recommendations are delivered to devices associated with the corresponding users (¶¶0026-0029; ¶0094: sending recommendations for gym equipment to users based on their profile. Recommendations are sent to user devices (¶0041)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Werner and generate personalized recommendations to corresponding users based on their profiles in order to suggest specific equipment for a workout plan that is available (Werner, ¶0092).
Concerning claim 2 , Hollar further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the at least some of the beacons and depth- cameras are configured in pairs (figs. 2A-2B; ¶¶0070-0071: UWB/Camera pairs).
Concerning claims 4 and 13, Hollar further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the beacon data determines device routes in the environment and the camera data determines user routes in the environment and demographics of the anonymous users, and wherein the combined routes each include device routes that match user routes (fig. 4; ¶¶0072-0074: cameras capture video of a user as they traverse a path and the UWB location devices capture beacon date of an UWB tag. The system can then associate the closest person object in the image to the UWB tag.; ¶0080: Visual parameters (e.g., hair color, eye color, shirt color, height, body shape and the like) of the users may also be determined.).
Concerning claims 6 and 15, Hollar further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the depth-cameras are associated with a model configured to classify objects in image data as humans (¶0073), and wherein positions in the environment are determined for the anonymous users (¶0073-¶0074: The location/position of a user can be determined).
Concerning claims 8 and 17, Hollar further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the beacons are ultra-wide band beacons and are mounted at an anticipated height of user devices in the environment such that locations are determined using two-dimensional processing (¶0091: It is well known that UWB transmission and reception performance is best using line of site (LOS) communication, therefore optimal placement for detecting a person with LOS communication would be at an anticipated height of a user.) and wherein the depth-cameras are mounted higher than the beacons (figs. 6-7 & ¶0073: show configurations where the camera is installed above the UWB location device), wherein the beacons track positions of devices in the environment using ultra-wide band signals (¶¶0064-0065; ¶0074).
Concerning claims 9 and 18, Werner teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising associating a user's application on the user's device with a corresponding user profile (¶¶0098-0099).
Concerning claim 20, Hollar teaches a system configured to build user profiles, the system comprising;
radio beacons mounted in an environment (fig. 3; ¶0070: a facility includes UWB location devices, cameras and UWB/camera devices; ¶0070: The environment comprises radio beacons and cameras that are positioned separately within the environment, see fig. 3: cameras 302 & 304 and radio beacons 303 & 305.), wherein each of the radio beacons is mounted at a height corresponding to an anticipated height of user devices in the environment (¶0091: It is well known that UWB transmission and reception performance is best using line of site (LOS) communication, therefore optimal placement for detecting a person with LOS communication would be at an anticipated height of a user), wherein the radio beacons are configured to determine locations of the user devices in the environment (¶¶0064-0065; ¶0074);
depth-cameras mounted in the environment at heights higher than the height at which the radio beacons are mounted (figs. 6-7 & ¶0073: show configurations where the camera is installed above the UWB location device), wherein the depth-cameras are configured to detect anonymous users and determine locations and demographics of the anonymous users in the environment (¶0073; ¶0121: visual attributes other than facial parameters (e.g., color, shape, size of the clothing) may be used in associating a user with data. This the identity of the user may remain anonymous);
a computing system comprising:
one or more processors (fig. 17: processor 1738); and
a memory including instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (fig. 17: memory 1736), cause the computing system to:
receive beacon data from the radio beacons and camera data from the depth-cameras (fig. 3; ¶¶0063-0065: processing unit 107 receives RF signals and image data from ultra-wide band (UWB) location devices and cameras, respectively);
pairing a depth camera and a radio beacon when a first (x,y) coordinate identified by beacon data from the depth camera is identical to a second (x,y) coordinate identified by camera data from the radio beacon (¶0067: “…the object can be located using a combination of UWB measurements and camera sensor data”; fig. 8 & ¶¶0095-0096: “…the UWB RTLS solution (i.e., the radio beacon) tracks the UWB tags and associates the tags' location with the field of view of the camera sensor when available”; fig. 15 D: intersection 1507); and
compare device routes generated from the messages from the radio beacons with user routes generated from the messages from the depth-cameras to generate a combined route for each of the anonymous users based on paired data between the beacon data and the camera data (¶¶0055-0056: the tracking technologies of the camera based systems and ultra-wideband (UWB) systems are combined; ¶0120: using the combined UWB/Camera real-time tracking (RTLS) network the system can develop a history of the person's movement and location; ¶0128: Shopping Mall application using historical user patterns based on movement analytics; ¶0132: using movement and location history as part of quality control in a manufacturing process; ¶0121: visual attributes other than facial parameters (e.g., color, shape, size of the clothing) may be used in associating a user with data. This the identity of the user may remain anonymous), wherein the combined routes are included in corresponding user profiles (¶0120: developing a history of the person's movement and location; ¶0125: building a history of a specific user), and
wherein facial information is neither captured nor retained for each anonymous user (¶0121: visual attributes other than facial parameters (e.g., color, shape, size of the clothing) may be used in associating a user with data). Hollar further teaches using the history of a user (i.e., a profile) to adjust the behavior of a system towards the user (¶0127-¶0136) but fails to explicitly teach wherein the computing system is further configured to generate personalized recommendations for each of the anonymous users based on the user profiles.
Werner et al. (hereinafter Werner), in the same field of endeavor, teaches generating personalized recommendations for each of the users based on corresponding user profiles, wherein the personalized recommendations are delivered to devices associated with the corresponding users (¶¶0026-0029; ¶0094: sending recommendations for gym equipment to users based on their profile. Recommendations are sent to user devices (¶0041)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Werner and generate personalized recommendations to corresponding users based on their profiles in order to suggest specific equipment for a workout plan that is available (Werner, ¶0092).
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollar et al. (US 20210304577 A1) in view of Werner et al. (US 20200179760 A1) and Laurans et al. (US 20210360446 A1).
Concerning claims 3 and 12, Hollar in view of Werner teaches the method of claim 2. Hollar further teaches the method, wherein, for a pair of a radio beacon and a depth-camera, and wherein the pair share (x,y) coordinates in a two dimensional plane (figs. 2A-2B; fig. 7A: 701 show a configuration of a hybrid UWB/camera location device installed as a single unit, therefore, they share (x,y) coordinates). Hollar further teaches situations where it is best to capture single images at a time rather than a continuous stream of images. The image capture may be triggered by a processing unit on a per-image basis (¶0062). Not explicitly taught is that the depth-camera is activated when the radio beacon detects a signal from a device.
Laurans et al. (hereinafter Laurans), in a similar field of endeavor, teaches using signals from a first sensor to send a wake-up signal to an imaging device (¶0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the features of Laurans to the Hollar invention and allow the signals captured by the radio beacon to activate the depth-camera in order to consume less power by keeping the device in a lower power state until the imaging device is needed (Laurans, ¶0032).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollar et al. (US 20210304577 A1) in view of Werner et al. (US 20200179760 A1) and Paripally et al. (US 20260087820 A1 claiming benefit to application No. 63/697,424).
Concerning claims 5 and 14, Hollar in view of Werner teaches the method of claim 4. Hollar teaches the method, further comprising, for each of the combined routes, analyzing image data from the cameras to determine demographic data for the corresponding user, wherein the demographic data includes height (¶0080). Not explicitly taught is the method, wherein the demographic data includes height, gender and age.
Paripally et al. (hereinafter Paripally), in a similar field of endeavor, teaches analyzing image data from the cameras to determine demographic data for the corresponding user, wherein the demographic data includes height, gender and age (¶0030). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Paripally to the Hollar invention in order to associate the demographic data an object detected in the image data and more accurately classify said detected object.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollar et al. (US 20210304577 A1) in view of Werner et al. (US 20200179760 A1) and Goldhammer (US 20240378753 A1).
Concerning claims 7 and 16, Hollar in view of Werner teaches the method of claim 1. Not explicitly taught is the method, further comprising resolving conflict, which includes recalibrating at least some of the sensors.
Goldhammer, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a monitoring method comprising resolving conflict, which includes recalibrating at least some of the sensors (¶0063: performing a recalibration to resolve sensor misalignment errors). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Goldhammer to the Hollar invention in order to correct misalignment of the sensors (Goldhammer, ¶0063).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollar et al. (US 20210304577 A1) in view of Werner et al. (US 20200179760 A1) and Fee et al. (US 20250292605 A1 claiming benefit to application No. 63/565,276).
Concerning claims 10 and 19, Hollar in view of Werner teaches the method of claim 1. Not explicitly taught is the method, further comprising performing a security operation when a user, based on a corresponding user profile, enters a restricted area.
Fee et al. (hereinafter Fee), in a similar field of endeavor, teaches multi-camera tracking comprising performing a security operation when a user, based on a corresponding user profile, enters a restricted area (¶0036: tracking a person entering a prohibited area and taking corrective actions such as sounding an alarm, alerting security personnel, performing a lockdown, etc.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Fee to the Hollar invention in order to actively surveil a restricted area and prevent unauthorized entry.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 of the remarks, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the objection of claim 19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 of the remarks, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. In light of the amendments, the rejection has been withdrawn and the claim is no longer interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f).
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11 of the remarks, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 11 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §103) have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Concerning the Hollar prior art, Applicant alleges “Thus, Hollar fails to teach or suggest “wherein the radio beacons and the depth-cameras are separately positioned within the environment”, as similarly recited in independent claims 1, 11 and 20.” This is not persuasive because Hollar explicitly teaches an environment comprising radio beacons and cameras that are positioned separately within the environment (see fig. 3: cameras 302 & 304 and radio beacons 303 & 305). Furthermore, in ¶0070, Hollar specifies that “…in some embodiments, there may only be Camera and UWB devices and no Camera/UWB devices…”. Accordingly, the examiner maintains that Hollar in view of Werner teaches the inventions of independent claims 1, 11 and 20.
The Applicant further alleges “Further, nowhere does Holler teach or suggest "pairing a depth camera and a radio beacon when a first (x,y) coordinate identified by beacon data from the depth camera is identical to a second (x,y) coordinate identified by camera data from the radio beacon, ... wherein facial information is neither captured nor retained for each anonymous user," as similarly recited in independent claims 1, 11, and 20.” This is not persuasive. Hollar teaches using radio beacon measurements and camera sensing data to identify the location of an object and that the UWB RTLS solution tracks the UWB tags and associates the tags' location with the field of view of the camera sensor when available (see, ¶0067 & ¶¶0095-0096). The execution of the UWB RTLS solution and the camera system working together is illustrated in figs. 15A-15D, wherein figure 15D specifically shows an intersection between the UWB measurement and the camera measurement. Accordingly, the examiner maintains that Hollar in view of Werner teaches the inventions of independent claims 1, 11 and 20.
Applicant does not argue dependent claims 2-10 and 12-19 separately with particularity. Accordingly, the rejections of these claims are maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)270-1444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, BRIAN PENDLETON can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/James M Anderson II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
