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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/09/2025 has been entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. GREECE 20200100245, filed on May 12, 2020, has been filed in Application No. 17/915,175, filed on September 28, 2022. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
It is also noted that the present application is a 371 National Phase Patent Application of PCT/US2021/026594, for which the 371(c) filing date is April 09, 2021.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10, 27-36 and 51-52 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations are interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Claim 51:
Line 3, “Means for receiving”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the function is “transceivers”. (paragraph [0065], Fig.2:254a-254r).
Line, 5 “Means for determining”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the function is “processor”. (paragraph [0062], Fig.2:280)
Line 7, “Means for obtaining”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the function is “processor”. (paragraph [62], Fig.2:280).
Line 9, “Means for providing”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the function is “transceivers” (paragraph [0066], Fig.2:254a-254r).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 27-31, 51, and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20170332192 A1) in view of Dong (US-20230189198-A1) in view of Siomina (US 20130188510 A1) in further view of Kazmi (US-20120276916-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Edge discloses a method of providing positioning information for a mobile device to a base station, comprising:
receiving, at the mobile device, a positioning request (Par.159, “an LSF integrated in 5G BS 220”) (paragraph [0159], Fig.4, "At block 402 for process 400, the LSF exchanges one or more first signaling messages with the UE, the one or more first signaling messages comprising:…(ii) a request sent to the UE for the location measurement; (iii) assistance data sent to the UE; or (iv) some combination of these." (i.e., Examiner also points to par.79 wherein the location server function (LSF) is implemented as part of BS, therefore whenever LSF is requesting location measurement, the request is from the BS.));
determining one or more positioning reference signal transmissions, of the base stations, (paragraph [0073], "…UEs 102 and 103 may be able to acquire and measure one or more TPS or PRS signals transmitted by one or more of 5G BS 220, 5G BS 222 and 5G TB 224 to enable location of UE 102 and/or UE 103…" (i.e., UE is measuring PRS signals.)),
obtaining, at the mobile device, position measurement information based on (1) the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions (paragraph [0073], "…UEs 102 and 103 may be able to acquire and measure one or more TPS or PRS signals transmitted by one or more of 5G BS 220, 5G BS 222 and 5G TB 224 to enable location of UE 102 and/or UE 103…" (i.e., UE performs measurements based on PRS.)),
providing the position measurement information from the mobile device to the base station (paragraph [0167], "In an optional block 406 for process 400, the LSF obtains a location estimate for the UE based at least in part on the location measurement received from the UE at block 402." (i.e., LSF that is integral of the BS receives position measurement.)).
However, Edge does not discloses receiving, at the mobile device, , of the base station, and associated duplex modes based on the accuracy requirement; obtaining, at the mobile device, position measurement information based on (1) the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions, (2) a respective duplex mode for each of the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions, and (3) the accuracy requirement.
Dong discloses receiving, at the mobile device, (paragraph [0176], Fig.8A, "S320: in response to receiving the first paging message carrying the positioning request message, the positioning measurement is performed;" and paragraph [0183], "the first paging message further carries positioning configuration." and paragraph [0186], "the positioning configuration is used for indicating at least one of the following:" and paragraph [0189], "a positioning quality of service (Qos) request;" and paragraph [0198], "the positioning QoS request, such as precision, and time delay;" (i.e., there is a level accuracy is needed when the UE reports the location measurement.));
Edge and Dong are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Locating users or terminals {or network equipment} for network management purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge to incorporate the method of Dong accuracy requirement because such a modification is the result of applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. More specifically, Dong UE of receiving QoS permits the UE to measure the position to a desired level of QoS or accuracy. This known benefit is applicable to Edge UE as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are both directed to locating terminals for network management purposes.
However, Edge in view of Dong do not explicitly disclose associated duplex modes; obtaining, at the mobile device, (2) a respective duplex mode for each of the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions, and (3) the accuracy requirement.
Siomina discloses determining one or more positioning reference signal transmissions, of the base station, and associated duplex modes based on the accuracy requirement (paragraph [0016], “Since for OTDOA positioning PRS signals from multiple distinct locations need to be measured… To facilitate user equipment measurements… transmits assistance data to the user equipment.” and paragraph [0103], "The transmitting node 101 may be a base station (BS), NodeB, evolved NodeB (eNB), relay, beacon, etc., i.e. any device transmitting signals over a radio carrier 102 to be measured by a terminal 103." and paragraph [0129], "positioning node 1005 acquires…" and paragraph [0133], "list of frequencies that the user equipment 103 may reserve for the measurements in question," and paragraph [0134], "duplex-related information, e.g. operated duplex mode or the related capability;" and paragraph [0137], "The set of preferred or reserved frequencies is generated while taking into account the current set of frequency layers monitored for positioning and/or other purposes." and paragraph [0141], Fig.2, "The positioning node 1005 creates a list of frequencies and cells or base stations 101, e.g. radio network nodes, within each frequency that satisfy the user equipment 103 and the radio network node capabilities, preferences or configurations acquired in Steps 201 and 203…the list may be sorted, ordered in the decreasing order of priority according to some priority." and paragraph [0177], "The eNodeB 101 may additionally indicate which of the carriers are used for positioning purpose i.e. which ones transmit positioning reference signals for enabling the UE 103 to perform the positioning measurements" and paragraph [0237], “Also, the UE 103 needs to know the duplex mode of the cell, i.e. whether a cell is FDD, HD-FDD or TDD, e.g. in order to correctly apply the PRS configuration defined in 3GPP,” and paragraph [0241], “The positioning node 1005 uses the UE 103 and/or radio network node 101 duplex capability or currently used duplex mode for the carrier frequencies in order to select the most appropriate carrier frequency for the inter-frequency positioning measurements. For example the positioning node 1005 may select a carrier frequency with half duplex FDD in case the BW of the PRS is large. This is because typically there may be fewer than normal number of DL sub-frames available for the positioning measurements when the carrier is configured or used as half duplex FDD.” (i.e., Edge discloses determining one or more positioning reference signal transmission, and Siomina discloses it can also determine one or more PRS as disclosed in par.16 and par.103, including the associated duplex modes in par.129 and par.134. Siomina further discloses of creating a list in par.141, "satisfy…the radio network node capabilities, preferences or configurations" in combination with Dong reads as determining one or more PRS based on the accuracy requirement. Examiner notes Siomina par.237 also teaches the UE needs to know the duplex mode of the cell in FDD, HD-FDD, or TDD and positioning node obtains the duplex mode either from UE or radio network node 101. Par.241 teaches the UE can choose to use HD-FDD when the PRS is large as in requiring a higher accuracy.));
obtaining, at the mobile device, position measurement information based on (1) the one or more positioning reference signal transmission (paragraph [0108], "the positioning node 1005 is an entity comprised in the user equipment 103. When the positioning node 1005 is comprised in the user equipment 103, the user equipment 103 performs positioning or determines the location itself," and paragraph [0155], Fig.2:210, "The target node 1003, e.g. the user equipment 103, performs inter-frequency measurements and/or inter-RAT measurements based on the assistance data and configuration information from the positioning node 1005. Furthermore, the position of the target node 1003 may be calculated based on the measurements." (i.e., Edge already teaches obtaining positioning measurement in par.73, examiner is using par.108 and par.155 to show Siomina also teaches obtaining positioning measurement. Par.108 discloses position node is located in the UE and therefore any positioning measurement performed by positioning node is being performed in the UE such as the target node 1003 in par.155, and par.155 further discloses the UE is performing measurement information based on the list determined by the positioning node 1005.)),
(2) a respective duplex mode for each of the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions (paragraph [0129], "The positioning node 1005 acquires, from the positioning target node 1003, e.g. user equipment 103, information related to the positioning target node 1003, e.g. the user equipment 103, where the information comprises e.g. at least one of:" and paragraph [0134], Fig.2:210, "duplex-related information, e.g. operated duplex mode or the related capability;" and paragraph [0144], "remove cells operating in a different duplex mode than the reference cell, e.g. keep only FDD or TDD," (i.e., Par.144 discloses the list is modified by positioning node, wherein the list can be modified based on duplex mode.)),
and (3) the accuracy requirement (paragraph [0143], “The positioning node 1005 modifies the list according to certain rules. If the number of frequencies in the cell priority list exceeds a maximum limit, the positioning node 1005 removes cells from the list. The following rules may be used:” and paragraph [0148], "remove frequencies and cells with the worst inter-frequency measurement quality statistics," and paragraph [0149], "remove frequencies and cells with the worst estimated or measured received signal strength or quality in the zone of interest." and paragraph [0151], “The modification is necessary to be able to guarantee the performance in the case of more than 2 frequencies.” (i.e., Par.143;148-149;151 teaches the list is modified to have the PRS signals to guarantee a level of performance.)).
Edge in view of Dong and Siomina are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Locating users or terminals {or network equipment} for network management purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge to incorporate the method of Siomina to create a list to determine the specific PRS signal to use based on the accuracy required (Edge, par.141) because depending on the service that requested the UE to measure the location requires high level accuracy (Siomina, paragraph [0008], “The possibility of identifying a user equipments geographical location in a wireless cellular communication network has enabled a large variety of commercial and non-commercial services, e.g., navigation assistance, social networking, location-aware advertising, emergency calls, etc. Different services may have different positioning accuracy requirements imposed by the application.”).
However, Edge in view of Dong in further view of Siomina do not explicitly disclose obtaining, at the mobile device, position measurement information based on (3) the accuracy requirement.
Kazmi discloses obtaining, at the mobile device, position measurement information based on (3) the accuracy requirement (paragraph [0097], Fig.3, " the condition defines a particular circumstance under which the measurement bandwidth must be re-configured to the reference-signal bandwidth in order to meet defined accuracy requirements for reference signal measurements (e.g., where the measurements are performed for positioning, RSTD accuracy requirements specified in 3GPP TS 36.133). Such condition may be that the device 36 will measure the reference signal 44 over a number of consecutive subframes that does not exceed a defined threshold, where this threshold is the minimum number of consecutive threshold needed to meet the accuracy requirements. Thus when this condition is met, the device 36 is already configured to measure the reference signal 44 for the minimum amount of time needed to meet the accuracy requirements and therefore will not be able to meet the requirements unless it measures the reference signal 44 over the full bandwidth with which that signal 44 is transmitted. Accordingly, when the condition is met, the measurement bandwidth is re-configured to the reference-signal bandwidth. " (i.e., the device 36 is the UE as shown in Fig.3 reconfigures the bandwidth in order to meet the accuracy requirement for reference signal measurement positioning. Dong discloses the base station of sending an accuracy requirement and UE performing positioning measurement as disclosed in Dong par.176 and par.189, but doesn’t explicitly state the UE is using the accuracy sent by the base station, and Siomina teaches the positioning node in the UE is modifying the list to meet a performance and that can be an accuracy requirement as taught in par.141;143;148-149;151 but doesn’t explicitly state accuracy requirement. Therefore, the examiner is relying on Kazmi to explicitly teach a UE performing positioning measurement based on accuracy requirement.)).
Edge in view of Dong in further view of Siomina and Kazmi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Locating users or terminals {or network equipment} for network management purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge to incorporate the method of Kazmi of re-configuring the bandwidth in order to meet with accuracy requirement, such a modification is the result of applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. More specifically, Kazmi UE modifies the bandwidth. This known benefit is applicable to Edge UE as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are both directed to locating terminals for network management purposes and Kazmi also discloses the flexibility to balance between refence signal measurement quality and data reception quality (Kazmi, paragraph [0053], “Other embodiments are described more fully herein that account for a device's serving-cell bandwidth by adopting a more balanced stance between reference signal measurement quality and data reception quality.”).
Regarding Claim 2, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi discloses the method of claim 1.
Siomina further discloses wherein determining the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions and associated duplex modes comprises determining that each in a half duplex slot (paragraph [0108], “the positioning node 1005 is an entity comprised in the user equipment 103. When the positioning node 1005 is comprised in the user equipment 103, the user equipment 103 performs positioning or determines the location itself,” and paragraph [0237], “the positioning node 1005 is enabled to acquire the duplex information of a particular band. This information in turn will allow the positioning node 1005 to select the carrier frequency which is most suitable for the inter-frequency measurements. The frequency band duplex information of the duplex mode used in the radio network node 101 for each carrier frequency, i.e. whether the carrier is FDD, TDD or half duplex FDD or even information such as duplex distance in case of variable duplex, may be acquired by the positioning node 1005 in a way very similar to that described for acquiring frequency-related information in earlier sections. E.g. the duplex information may be obtained via the UE 103,” (i.e., Siomina discloses the positioning node determines the duplex mode such as half duplex in order to apply the most suitable for inter-frequency measurements.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 3 Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi discloses the method of claim 1.
Siomina further discloses wherein determining the one or more positioning reference signal transmissions and associated duplex modes comprises determining that each in a full duplex slot (paragraph [0108], “the positioning node 1005 is an entity comprised in the user equipment 103. When the positioning node 1005 is comprised in the user equipment 103, the user equipment 103 performs positioning or determines the location itself,” and paragraph [0237], “the positioning node 1005 is enabled to acquire the duplex information of a particular band. This information in turn will allow the positioning node 1005 to select the carrier frequency which is most suitable for the inter-frequency measurements. The frequency band duplex information of the duplex mode used in the radio network node 101 for each carrier frequency, i.e. whether the carrier is FDD, TDD or half duplex FDD or even information such as duplex distance in case of variable duplex, may be acquired by the positioning node 1005 in a way very similar to that described for acquiring frequency-related information in earlier sections. E.g. the duplex information may be obtained via the UE 103,” (i.e., Siomina discloses the positioning node determines the duplex mode such as full duplex in order to apply the most suitable for inter-frequency measurements.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 4, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi discloses the method of claim 1.
Edge further discloses wherein the position measurement information includes reference signal time difference measurements (paragraph [0063], "UE 102 may also or instead obtain measurements of RSSI, RTT…and/or RSTD for TPS signals received from eNBs 104 and 106 and/or other base stations and APs not shown in FIG. 1." (i.e., UE measures RSTD for TPS signals and TPS signal can be PRS signal as explained in par.34-35.)).
Regarding Claim 5, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi discloses the method of claim 1.
Edge further discloses wherein the position measurement information includes Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) or Round Trip Time (RTT) measurements (paragraph [0063], Fig., "UE 102 may also or instead obtain measurements of RSSI, RTT…and/or RSTD for TPS signals received from eNBs 104 and 106 and/or other base stations and APs not shown in FIG. 1." (i.e., Examiner also points to Par.34-35 wherein the TPS can be PRS.)).
Regarding Claim 27, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 28, which is similar in scope to claim 2, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 29, which is similar in scope to claim 3, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 30, which is similar in scope to claim 4, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 31, which is similar in scope to claim 5, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 51, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 52, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 6-7, 32-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20170332192 A1) in view of Dong (US-20230189198-A1) in view of Siomina (US 20130188510 A1) in view of Kazmi (US-20120276916-A1) in further view of PAN (US 20200037297 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi do not disclose wherein a downlink positioning measurement is obtained by the mobile device concurrently with an uplink transmission from the mobile device.
Pan discloses wherein a downlink positioning measurement (Par.288, received PRS) is obtained by the mobile device concurrently with an uplink transmission (Par.53, UL) from the mobile device (paragraph [0053], Fig.1B, "The WTRU 102 may include a full duplex radio for which transmission and reception of some or all of the signals (e.g., associated with particular subframes for both the UL (e.g., for transmission) and DL (e.g., for reception) may be concurrent and/or simultaneous." and paragraph [0288], "The WTRU position change may be derived, calculated, measured, or determined based on a change in received signal time difference (RSTD) of a signal, for example, a CRS or a PRS." (i.e., wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) has a full duplex radio to receive DL that could be positioning reference signal PRS and transmit uplink information that could the positioning measurement that has been derived by the WTRU 102 and there would be times where the uplink and downlink would be concurrent.)).
Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in further view of Kazmi and Pan are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of 5G communication of WTRU and base station. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge user equipment (Edge, Fig.1:102, UE) to include a full duplex radio for concurrent downlink and uplink transmissions because it would lead to faster communication with base station and has a feature to reduce self-interference (Pan, paragraph [0053], “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118).”).
Regarding Claim 7, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in further view of Pan disclose the method of claim 6.
Pan further discloses wherein one or more symbols (Par.53, OFDM symbols) of the downlink positioning measurement overlap with one or more symbols of the uplink transmission. (paragraph [0053], Fig.1B, "The WTRU 102 may include a full duplex radio for which transmission and reception of some or all of the signals (e.g., associated with particular subframes for both the UL (e.g., for transmission) and DL (e.g., for reception) may be concurrent and/or simultaneous." and paragraph [0073] "The WTRUs 102a, 102b, 102c may communicate with gNBs 180a, 180b, 180c using subframe or transmission time intervals (TTIs) of various or scalable lengths (e.g., containing a varying number of OFDM symbols…)." (i.e., since transmission and reception are simultaneous the OFDM symbols could be overlapping. One or more symbols of downlink positioning measurement maps similar to par.288 received PRS or OFDM of PRS, and one or more symbols of uplink transmission is WTRU derived location providing to base station by communicating with OFDM symbols.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 32, which is similar in scope to claim 6, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 33, which is similar in scope to claim 7, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 8, and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20170332192 A1) in view of Dong (US-20230189198-A1) in view of Siomina (US 20130188510 A1) in view of Kazmi (US-20120276916-A1) in view of PAN (US 20200037297 A1) in further view of Chen (US 20190045495 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in further view of Pan disclose the method of claim 7.
However, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in further view of Pan do not disclose further comprising providing slot information to the base station based on an overlap of the one or more symbols of the downlink positioning measurement and the one or more symbols of the uplink transmission.
Chen discloses further comprising providing slot information to the base station based on an overlap (Par.112, collision handling) of the one or more symbols of the downlink positioning measurement and the one or more symbols of the uplink transmission (paragraph [0112], "Additionally, certain UEs 115 may explicitly support…collision handling (e.g., two adjacent transmissions in different directions or different subbands)" and paragraph [0118], "The slot structures 215 may include symbols designated for downlink control 220, downlink data 225, guard periods 230, uplink control 235, and uplink data 240." and paragraph [0137], Fig.525, "At operation 525, UE 115-b may determine a second slot structure… second slot structure may be an operation to be performed by UE 115-b." and paragraph [0139], Fig.5:535, "At operation 535, UE 115-b and base station 105-b may communicate using…using the second slot structure." (i.e., when UE detects an overlap or a collision it would establish connection with base station specific slots in this case second slot structure to inform an overlap or a collision has occurred. Overlap and collision is being read as the same term.)).
Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in further view of Pan and Chen are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of communication for base station and user equipment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge during any LPP message with the base station when an overlap occurs because the UE (Edge, Fig.1:102, UE) has a full duplex radio (Pan, par.53) and would benefit to dedicate slot structure to communicate with a base station to inform of a collision or an overlap in order to have the downlink transmission to be resent in order to keep determining the UE position based on the position reference signals and Chen techniques improves the slot structure linkage in wireless systems (Chen, paragraph [0005], “The described techniques relate to improved methods, systems, devices, or apparatuses that support slot structure linkage in wireless systems.”).
Regarding Claim 34, which is similar in scope to claim 8, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 9, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20170332192 A1) in view of Dong (US-20230189198-A1) in view of Siomina (US 20130188510 A1) in view of Kazmi (US-20120276916-A1) in view of PAN (US 20200037297 A1) in view of Chen (US 20190045495 A1) in further view of PALANIVELU (US 20180097596 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in view of Pan in further view of Chen discloses the method of claim 8.
However, Edge in view of Siomina in view of Pan in further view of Chen do not disclose wherein the slot information comprises a bitmap based on the one or more symbols in the overlap.
PALANIVELU discloses wherein the slot information comprises a bitmap (Par.82, bitmap) based on the one or more symbols in the overlap (paragraph [0082], Fig.13:1302, "The method 1300 may be employed by …the UEs 102 and 300." and paragraph [0086] "In an embodiment, the method 1300 may use a bitmap (e.g., the bitmask 1302) that is of a same length as a DL scheduling valid subframe configuration along with other parameters such as periodicity."(i.e., when UE determines that there was an overlap or a collision and communicates with a base station in the second slot structure the UE would also include bitmap to indicate where the overlap happened.)).
Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in view of Pan in further view of Chen and PALANIVELU are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of locating users or terminals or network equipment for network management purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge when sending message to base station to include bitmap because it is desirable to map invalid DL subframes of positioning reference signals (PALANIVELU, paragraph [0086], “The method 1300 may be useful, for example, if it is desirable to schedule NPRSs on invalid DL subframes.”).
Regarding Claim 35, which is similar in scope to claim 9, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 10, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20170332192 A1) in view of Dong (US-20230189198-A1) in view of Siomina (US 20130188510 A1) in view of Kazmi (US-20120276916-A1) in view of PAN (US 20200037297 A1) in view of Chen (US 20190045495 A1) in further view of Liu (US 20170302419 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in view of Pan in further view of Chen discloses the method of claim 8.
However, Edge in view of Siomina in view of Pan in further view of Chen do not disclose wherein the slot information comprises a flag variable to indicate a presence of the overlap.
Liu discloses wherein the slot information comprises a flag variable to indicate a presence of the overlap (paragraph [0111], Fig.19:1920, "a UE to notify a base station…FIG. 19 is a diagram of a frame format of an uplink control message 1901 for signaling uplink and downlink…The uplink control message 1901 includes…a flag field 920…The flag field 920 may consist of a single bit" (i.e., when the UE detects a collision or overlap the UE would include a flag and in the flag indicate a value that can be set if there is a presence of the overlap or not.)).
Edge in view of Dong in view of Siomina in view of Kazmi in view of Pan in further view of Chen and Liu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of user equipment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Edge UE (Edge, Fig. 1:102, UE) to include a flag field (Liu, Fig.19:1920) as it can provide a low-overhead format or minimize control data being sent from UE to base station (Liu, paragraph [0111], “Embodiments of this disclosure provide a low-overhead frame format for signaling a UE's uplink/downlink RF retuning delays.”). Although the flag is configured for RF returning delays indication, Edge UE is modified by Chen to include a second slot structure (Chen, par.118) to communicate with a base station and a UE can perform a specific operation (Chen, par.112, “UEs 115 may explicitly support…collision handling”). The UE can use a flag field to speed up the process of sending a communication of a collision presence to the base station as the base station would need to do is check the flag if there was a collision or not.
Regarding Claim 36, which is similar in scope to claim 10, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US Patent Publication 2009 0296609 A1 to Choi et al. discloses wireless network system to dynamically change between full-duplex FDD and half-duplex FDD.
US Patent Publication 2019 0037529 A1 to EDGE et al. discloses positioning mobile device using PRS beamforming.
US Patent Publication 2016 0330011 A1 to Lee et al. discloses interference avoidance.
US Patent Publication 2019 0053280 A1 to RICO ALVARINO et al. discloses collision response action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erkin S. Abdullaev whose telephone number is (571)272-4135. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday - 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571)272-7867. 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.
/ERKIN ABDULLAEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648