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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on 12/17/2025 are entered for prosecution. Claims 41, 43, 47-49, 51, 53-57, 68-71 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome rejections to the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 09/23/2025. The rejections are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 41, 43, 47-49, 51, 53-57, 68-71 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant appears to assert that the disclosure in Specification ¶[0096] — “[b]y the wireless device 110 providing the information about the first location information request ... the wireless device 110 enables the radio network node 120 to act as an LMC, and determine the location of the wireless device 110 relying on location measurements that the wireless device 110 may provide to it ... e.g., in a measurement report” — does not constitute a “positioning protocol session”. (Remarks at 10-12). Examiner disagrees. As discussed in Claim Interpretation below, the disclosure in ¶[0096] would qualify as a “positioning protocol” and therefore does not support the limitation “without relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location of the wireless device from a positioning protocol session”.
Applicant further contends that “[t]he specification expressly states that the embodiments in the first group refrain from relying on an LPP procedure,” citing Specification ¶[0096] ("This enables the radio network node 120 to act as LMC with a simplified architecture ... since this may enable the radio network node 120 to refrain from relying on an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) procedure ...)” (Remarks at 11; emphasis added). Examiner agrees that the cited paragraph discloses refraining from relying on a specific positioning protocol session — namely, an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) session — which is different from refraining from relying on any positioning protocol session. An amendment to the claims or specification limiting “positioning protocol session” to a specific positioning protocol session, such as LTE positioning protocol (LPP) as specified in 3GPP TS 36.355, would overcome the outstanding new matter rejection. However, such an amendment would change the scope of the claims and require a search update and additional consideration, which would not be appropriate for an after-final submission.
Claim Interpretation
The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “Radio Resource Control (RRC)” recited in Claims 41, 47, 51, and 55 includes anything that somehow controls radio resource in a wireless communication network (See the instant specification, PGPub, [0001] “Embodiments herein relate to a wireless device, a radio network node and methods performed therein regarding wireless communication. In particular, embodiments herein relate to handling positioning of the wireless device in a wireless communication network.”), the wireless communication network including “New Radio (NR), Wi-Fi, Long Term Evolution (LTE), LTE-Advanced, Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA), Global System for Mobile communications/enhanced Data rate for GSM Evolution (GSM/EDGE), Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMax), or Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB), just to mention a few possible implementations.” (See the instant specification, PGPub [0002], [0225]).
The BRI of “MeasConfig information element” recited in claims 41, 47, 51 and 55 includes anything that specifies measurements to be performed in a wireless communication network, because according to the instant specification “[0079] In some embodiments, the first location information request may be comprised in a MeasConfig information element. [0081] The IE MeasConfig may be understood to be specify measurements to be performed by the wireless device 110, and may cover intra-frequency, inter-frequency and inter-RAT mobility as well as configuration of measurement gaps.” (Emphasis added. See also discussion of wireless communication network above.)
The BRI of “measResults information element” recited in claims 41, 47, 51 and 55 includes anything that are related to measured results in a wireless communication network, because according to the instant specification “[0094] The information about the first location may, in some embodiments, be a measurement report. The measurement report may be comprised in a MeasResults information element. The IE MeasResults may be understood to cover measured results for intra-frequency, inter-frequency, and inter-RAT mobility.” (Emphasis added. See also discussion of wireless communication network above.)
The BRI of “MeasAndMobParameters information element” recited in claims 43, 49, 53 and 57 includes anything that conveys wireless device capabilities related to measurements and mobility in a wireless communication network, because according to the instant specification “[0061] In some embodiments, the capability indication may be comprised in a MeasAndMobParameters information element. The information element (IE) MeasAndMobParameters may be used to convey wireless device capabilities related to measurements for radio resource management (RRM), radio link monitoring (RLM) and mobility e.g., handover.” (Emphasis added. See also discussion of wireless communication network above.)
The BRI of a “positioning protocol” in “without relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location of the wireless device from a positioning protocol session” as recited in Claims 41, 47, 51 and 55 includes any protocol somehow related to positioning, which includes but not limited to Location Services (LCS) protocols, LTE Positioning Protocol (LPP), and a protocol of “[b]y the wireless device 110 providing the information about the first location information request ... the wireless device 110 enables the radio network node 120 to act as an LMC, and determine the location of the wireless device 110 relying on location measurements that the wireless device 110 may provide to it ... e.g., in a measurement report” as disclosed in Specification, [0096].
The BRI of the limitation “without relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location of the wireless device from a positioning protocol session” requires no session of any positioning protocol be invoked or relied upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 41, 47, 51 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 41, 47, 51 and 55:
The original disclosure does not support “determin[ing] a location of the wireless device from the information in the RRC message provided to the radio network node (received from the wireless device), without relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location of the wireless device from a positioning protocol session.”
As discussed in Claim Interpretation above, “without relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location of the wireless device from a positioning protocol session” recited in 41, 47, 51 and 55 requires no positioning protocol session be invoked and relied upon.
However, throughout the specification “determin[ing] a location of the wireless device” is described as relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location from a positioning protocol session.” For example, see the instant specification, PGPub, [0023]: “By the wireless device providing the location procedure configuration, that is, the flag or the PDCP Control PDU, to the radio network node, the wireless device enables the radio network node to make a decision on whether to invoke LCS functionality or not, and obtain the location of the wireless device relying on the already ongoing LPP session the wireless device may have. This may be understood to considerably shorten the latency of the location procedure, since the radio network node may be enabled to know that it may request the location information from the core network, refraining from initiating a new LPP session from the beginning itself. The location information that may then be obtained by the radio network node may be up to date, as the LPP session is ongoing, and obtained within a shorter time period, and with reduced signalling.” As another example, see the specification [0096] which discloses relying on or invoking a procedure to obtain the location from a positioning protocol session of “[b]y the wireless device 110 providing the information about the first location information request ... the wireless device 110 enables the radio network node 120 to act as an LMC, and determine the location of the wireless device 110 relying on location measurements that the wireless device 110 may provide to it ... e.g., in a measurement report”. See also [0084], [0100], [0107]-[0108], [0124], [0174]-[0175].
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moo Ryong Jeong whose telephone number is (571)272-9617. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached on (571)272-0734. 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.
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418