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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on5/1/2026 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 4-6, 9, 15, 16, 19 and 20 are amended, claims 24-46 are canceled, and claims 1-23 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 4-11, 13-17 and 19-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn based on arguments presented during interview conducted on 4/15/2026.
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 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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-11, 13-17 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wietfeldt et al. (US 20170070971 A1 and Wietfeldt hereinafter), in view of Hui (US 20110029229 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wietfeldt teaches a user equipment (UE) (Figure 6 and Paragraph 0125; mobile device 1100) comprising:
a memory (Figure 6 and Paragraph 0125; mobile device 1100 may comprise a memory 1140);
a receiver configured to receive wireless signals (Figure 6 and Paragraphs 0123 and 0125; wireless transceiver 1121 which is capable of transmitting and receiving wireless signals); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the receiver (Figure 6 and Paragraphs 0124 and 0125; processor 1111 or DSP 1112 may execute one or more instructions stored in memory 1140) and configured to:
receive, via the receiver, a positioning signal from a first positioning signal source (Figure 2 and paragraphs 0037 and 0038; SPS [satellite positioning system] signals 202 may be acquired by elements on the ground such as a UE of user segment 252), the positioning signal being a radio frequency signal (Examiner asserts that SPS signals are radio frequency signal);
receive, via the receiver, one or more indications corresponding to one or more failures of the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0060; instruction [received at the UE] may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations. Figure 3 and Paragraphs 0107 and 0109; multi-GNSS location server 306 may not alter or modify augmentation parameters but instead provide a message indicating that measurements obtained from acquisition of particular SV signals, signals from particular SVs or signals from SVs in a particular GNSS constellation are invalid or not reliable);
disable a first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV) based on the one or more indications (Paragraph 0060; instruction [received at the UE] may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations. Figure 3 and Paragraphs 0107 and 0109; multi-GNSS location server 306 may not alter or modify augmentation parameters but instead provide a message indicating that measurements obtained from acquisition of particular SV signals, signals from particular SVs or signals from SVs in a particular GNSS constellation are invalid or not reliable); and
perform a second positioning-signal-processing function of the UE (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV. Paragraph 0077; central server 256 may derive assistance parameters and/or correction parameters based at least in part on observations obtained from WARN reference stations and/or UEs, the UE may use the assistance parameters to derive its position faster and with higher accuracy. Examiner asserts that the determine position using the parameters may be also interpreted as a second positioning-signal-processing function. Therefore the second positioning-signal-processing function is different than the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE), using the positioning signal from the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0064; central server 256 may instruct the UE to obtain and report observations indicative of certain types of fault (e.g. a fault or faults that Central Server may have inferred from fault reports received from some UEs or may suspect from receipt of inconsistent or erroneous GNSS measurements from UEs and needs to be confirmed and/or augmented with further fault reports from other UEs). Such configuration commands may indicate, for example, particular conditions or events to be observed, threshold values to be applied to measurements in determining whether a fault condition exists or event of interest has occurred, just to provide a few examples. Examiner asserts that UE obtain and report observations indicative of certain types of fault may be interpreted as second positioning-signal-processing function. In addition, in Paragraph 0077; central server 256 may derive assistance parameters and/or correction parameters based at least in part on observations obtained from WARN reference stations and/or UEs, the UE may use the assistance/correction/augmentation parameters to derive its position faster and with higher accuracy. Examiner asserts that the determine position using the parameters may be also interpreted as a second positioning-signal-processing function) while the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE is disabled (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred).
Wietfeldt does not explicitly teach perform a second positioning-signal-processing function of the UE, that is a different function than the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE. In an analogous art, Hui teaches perform a second positioning-signal-processing function of the UE, that is a different function than the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE (Paragraphs 0040 and 0041; device 10 may periodically monitor the received RF signal strength at device 10 and compare that value to a predetermined threshold. When the received RF signal strength fall below the predetermined threshold, the device 10 activates GPS receiver to determine a location, and continue to monitor the received RF signal strength. Examiner asserts that continue monitoring the received RF signal strength is considered as the second positioning-signal-processing function. Paragraph 0006; the wireless communication device comprises a transceiver to communicate radio frequency signals with a wireless communication network, and periodically stores a current geographic location of the wireless communication device. Examiner asserts that determine location using radio frequency signals received via transceiver to and from a wireless communication network is interpreted as first positioning-signal-processing function). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wietfeldt and Hui because it would provide location and guidance for user in areas where wireless networks are notably weak and unreliable (Hui, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claims 2 and 17, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the processor is configured to disable the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV) in response to the one or more indications indicating that information in the positioning signal used for the first positioning-signal-processing function is invalid, or stale, or both (Paragraph 0060; instruction [received at the UE] may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations. Figure 3 and Paragraphs 0107 and 0109; multi-GNSS location server 306 may not alter or modify augmentation parameters but instead provide a message indicating that measurements obtained from acquisition of particular SV signals, signals from particular SVs or signals from SVs in a particular GNSS constellation are invalid or not reliable).
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 19, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1, 9 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the processor is configured to, in response to one or more indications corresponding to one or more failures of multiple positioning signal sources in a constellation of positioning signal sources (Paragraph 0060; central server 250 aggregate the fault reports sent by many UEs and look for: (i) similar or identical faults reported by UEs in the same local area and at around the same time (e.g., within 10 minutes to one hour of each other) which may indicate jamming, spoofing or some other interference condition in that local area; (ii) similar or identical faults reported in association with particular SVs belonging to the same GNSS constellation by UEs over a wide area (e.g. part of a country, a whole country, a continent) which may indicate a systemic fault or failure in particular SVs or of a whole GNSS constellation), disable the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for all of the multiple positioning signal sources in the constellation of positioning signal sources (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may then instruct UEs not to attempt measuring particular SV signals and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Instruction from control server 256 to the UEs may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations).
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 20, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1, 9 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the processor is configured to, in response to one or more indications corresponding to one or more failures of a first plurality of positioning signal sources in a constellation of positioning signal sources (Paragraph 0060; instruction [received at the UE] may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations): disable the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for the first plurality of positioning signal sources in the constellation of positioning signal sources (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation [these signal sources may be interpreted as first plurality of positioning signal sources in the constellation] for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV); and perform the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE using positioning signals from a second plurality of positioning signal sources in the constellation of positioning signal sources (Paragraph 0060; in addition, central server 256 may instruct UEs to attempt to use other SVs, other SV signals and/or other GNSS constellations [these signal sources may be interpreted as second plurality of positioning signal sources in the constellation] while obtaining a UE location – e.g., by instructing UEs only to use SVs, SV signals and/or GNSS constellations for which central server 256 is not aware of any faults. Figure 3 and Paragraph 0109; multi-GNSS location server 306 may request UEs 308 and 312 to acquire and measure only SV signals, only SVs and/or only GNSS constellations that are not known to have faults while requesting any of UEs 308 and 312 to obtain a UE location estimate or return GNSS pseudorange or carrier phase measurements to multi-GNSS location server 306 (e.g., while multi-GNSS location server 306 needs to obtain or compute a location estimate for a UE)), the first plurality of positioning signal sources and the second plurality of positioning signal sources being mutually exclusive (Paragraph 0060; since central server instruct UEs to not use certain signals transmitted by particular SVs [interpreted as the first plurality of positioning signal sources], and attempt to use other SVs and/or other SV signals [from the particular SVs] [interpreted as the second plurality of positioning signal sources], therefore the first and the second plurality of positioning signal sources are being mutually exclusive since one source cannot be both instructed to not use and instructed to use).
Regarding claims 6, 15 and 21, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1, 9 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the processor is configured to disable the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV) for a fixed amount of time from a start time (Paragraph 0059; the UE may send a “fault message” to central server 256 including parameters such as UE location, current time-stamp and time duration. Paragraph 0066; central server 256 may process fault messages received from UEs and/or WARN reference stations to infer a high probability of the occurrence of a fault event. Paragraph 0060; control server may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Paragraph 0067; central server may maintain a database to store interference event reports and other event reports associated with possible faults including details of particular events such as, for example, event type, event time, event duration, event history (such as outage history), and may distribute the database over multiple different entities. Examiner asserts that the event time and duration may also be shared to UE. Paragraph 0079; possible parameters provided in messages from central server 256 to UE may comprise SV predicted code phase confidence intervals) and to enable the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE for the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0078; an SV in a GNSS may broadcast accurate SV position/clock directly to a UE as “broadcast ephemeris”, and may be updated periodically by control segment 260. Examiner asserts that it would have been obvious that a fault SV or condition may be fixed after certain amount of time, and the UE would be able to use the positioning signal source after the repair. Paragraphs 0107 and 0109; GNSS location server 306 may request UEs 308 and 312 to acquire and measure only SV signals, only SVs and/or only GNSS constellations that are not known to have faults while requesting any of UEs 308 and 312 to obtain a UE location estimate or return GNSS pseudorange or carrier phase measurements to multi-GNSS location server 306 (e.g., while multi-GNSS location server 306 needs to obtain or compute a location estimate for a UE)) after passage of the fixed amount of time from the start time (Paragraph 0059; the UE may send a “fault message” to central server 256 including parameters such as UE location, current time-stamp and time duration. Paragraph 0066; central server 256 may process fault messages received from UEs and/or WARN reference stations to infer a high probability of the occurrence of a fault event. Paragraph 0060; control server may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Paragraph 0067; central server may maintain a database to store interference event reports and other event reports associated with possible faults including details of particular events such as, for example, event type, event time, event duration, event history (such as outage history), and may distribute the database over multiple different entities. Examiner asserts that the event time and duration may also be shared to UE. Paragraph 0079; possible parameters provided in messages from central server 256 to UE may comprise SV predicted code phase confidence intervals).
Regarding claims 7 and 22, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches further comprising a transmitter (Figure 6 and Paragraph 0123; mobile device 1100 may comprise a wireless transceiver 1121 which is capable of transmitting and receiving wireless signals 1123 via wireless antenna 1122 over a wireless communication network) communicatively coupled to the processor (Figure 6 and Paragraph 0123; wireless transceiver 1121 may be connected to bus 1101 by a wireless transceiver bus interface 1120. Paragraph 0125; mobile device 1100 may comprise DSP(s) 1112 connected to the bus 1101. Since both the wireless transceiver 1121 and DSP(s) 1112 are connected to bus 1101, these two components are communicatively coupled to each other) and configured to transmit wireless signals (Figure 6 and Paragraph 0123; mobile device 1100 may comprise a wireless transceiver 1121 which is capable of transmitting and receiving wireless signals 1123 via wireless antenna 1122 over a wireless communication network), wherein the processor is configured to determine a failure of a second positioning signal source based on a second satellite signal from the second positioning signal source, or lack of receipt of the second satellite signal (Paragraphs 0033 and 0059; mobile devices 100 may detect conditions that may be indicative of a fault or erroneous operation of one or more GNSSs constellations based on acquisition of SPS signals. Paragraphs 0060; examples of a fault condition that a UE may detect fault conditions), and to send an indication of the failure of the second positioning signal source to a base station, or a location server, or a combination thereof, via the transmitter (Paragraphs 0033 and 0059; mobile devices 100 may transmit fault messages indicting the detected conditions to one or more of servers 140, 150 or 155 and central server 256 through network 130. Figures 2 and 3, Paragraph 0060; UE may indicate a fault condition to central server 256).
Regarding claims 8 and 23, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein: the first positioning-signal-processing function comprises positioning signal data demodulation (Paragraph 0142; positioning assistance data is demodulated from one or more of the SPS signals) and the second positioning-signal-processing function comprises signal acquisition (Paragraph 0060; inability to detect and measure a particular signal (e.g. at a particular frequency) from a particular SV (e.g. after successfully detecting and measuring a different signal at possibly a different frequency from the same SV). Examiner asserts that the detecting/receiving a particular SV at a different frequency as signal acquisition); or the first positioning-signal-processing function comprises positioning signal data demodulation and the second positioning-signal-processing function comprises signal tracking (Since this limitation is in alternative “or” form, please refer to the reference mapping in the limitation above); or the first positioning-signal-processing function comprises decoding time and the second positioning-signal-processing function comprises data demodulation (Since this limitation is in alternative “or” form, please refer to the reference mapping in the limitation above).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claim 9, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the one or more indications comprise an instruction to disable the first positioning-signal-processing function for the first positioning signal source (Paragraph 0060; control server 256 may instruct the UE to not to attempt measuring particular SV signals, signals transmitted by particular SVs, and/or signals transmitted by SVs in a particular GNSS constellation for which some fault has been inferred. Thus the first positioning-signal-processing function may be measuring the received signal from particular SV. Instruction from control server 256 to the UEs may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations. Alternatively or in addition, central server 256 may instruct UEs to attempt to use other SVs, other SV signals and/or other GNSS constellations while obtaining a UE location or measuring SV pseudoranges—e.g. by instructing UEs only to use SVs, SV signals and/or GNSS constellations for which Central Server 256 is not aware of any faults).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Wietfeldt and Hui teaches all of the limitations of claim 9, as described above. Further, Wietfeldt teaches wherein the one or more indications comprise an indication that information sent by the first positioning signal source is unreliable for use in the first positioning-signal-processing function (Paragraph 0060; instruction [received at the UE] may be in the form of indicating an explicit fault in particular SVs, particular SV signals and/or particular GNSS constellations. Alternatively or in addition, central server 256 may instruct UEs to attempt to use other SVs, other SV signals and/or other GNSS constellations while obtaining a UE location or measuring SV pseudoranges—e.g. by instructing UEs only to use SVs, SV signals and/or GNSS constellations for which Central Server 256 is not aware of any faults).
Pertinent References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Moeglein et al. (US 20100178934 A1 and Moeglein hereinafter) discloses estimating a location of a mobile station based on one or more measurements obtained from the mobile station, such measurements may be combined based on estimates of measurement errors associated with the signal sources.
Garin et al. (US 20080129593 A1 and Garin hereinafter) discloses numerical integration may provide incorrect results if there has been a change in satellite state, and these changes can be detected using Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) to prevent computation of erroneous user position.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 12 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant's invention is drawn to a device and a method that disables a positioning processing function of the UE based on indications that positioning signal source failed, and performs a second positioning processing function while the first positioning processing function is disabled.
The prior arts, Wietfeldt, Hui, Lin, Moeglein, Garin and a thorough search discloses various aspects and features of applicant's claimed invention but fail to explicitly or implicitly teach or disclose wherein the first positioning-signal-processing function of the UE and the second positioning-signal-processing function of the UE are part of a hierarchy of positioning-signal-processing functions, and wherein the processor is configured to disable positioning-signal-processing functions of the hierarchy that are lower in the hierarchy and in a common path of the first positioning-signal-processing function in conjunction with disabling the first positioning-signal-processing function. These functions, in combination of remaining functions are neither taught nor disclosed by the prior art.
Accordingly, Applicant’s claims 3, 12 and 18 are allowed for these reasons.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F.
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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jing Gao/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights