DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/17/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
3. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 12/17/2025. Claims 1-40 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
4. The claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f) of claims 11, 16, and 19 is acknowledged by the amendment. Therefore, the claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f) of 11, 16, and 19 remains unchanged. See below for details.
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 11, 21 and 31 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection because of the amendments.
Claim Interpretation
6. 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.
7. The claims (11, 16, and 19) 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.
8. 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 (1) “uplink measuring means for measuring an uplink positioning reference signal received from via the transceiver from a second user equipment separate from the first user equipment, the uplink positioning reference signal having an uplink channel configuration; or sidelink measuring means for measuring a first sidelink positioning reference signal received from via the transceiver from a third user equipment separate from the first user equipment, the first sidelink positioning reference signal having a first sidelink channel configuration; or sending means for sending a second sidelink positioning reference signal via the transceiver to a fourth user equipment separate from the first user equipment, the second sidelink” in claim 11; (2) “means for receiving positioning information, from the transceiver, received by the transceiver from another user equipment via a sidelink channel; and means for sending the positioning information to a network entity” in claim 16; and (3) “means for determining positioning information from the first sidelink positioning reference signal; and means for sending the positioning information to a network entity” in claim 19 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.
9. 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.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well.
Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states:
A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
11. Claims 1, 6 9-11, 16, 19-21, 26, 29-31, 36 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by LI et al. (US 20170079006) ((hereinafter LI).
Regarding claims 1, 11, 21 and 31:
As shown in figures 1-12, LI discloses a first user equipment (see positioning node in figures 4 and 8. In par 0056, LI teaches “the positioning node is specifically a terminal that supports a device to device D2D communications function”) configured for wireless signal transfer (see wireless signal exchange in figures 1-2, 4), the first user equipment (see positioning node in figures 4 and 8) comprising:
a transceiver (see transmitter 702 / receiver 701 in figure 8) configured to transmit outbound signals wirelessly and receive inbound signals wirelessly (figures 1-2, 4, par 0118);
a memory (705 in figure 8); and
a processor (704 in figure 8), communicatively coupled to the transceiver (701/702 in figure 8) and the memory (705 in figure 8), and configured to at least one of:
measure an uplink positioning reference signal received via the transceiver (steps 4-5 of figure 4 shows positioning node measure an uplink positioning reference signal received UE), from a second user equipment (see US in figure 4) separate from the first user equipment (see positioning node in figures 4 and 8), the uplink positioning reference signal having an uplink channel configuration (in par 0129, LI teaches “The N positioning nodes receive, according to the configuration information, the uplink positioning reference signal sent by the UE 30, and obtain N measurement results according to the uplink positioning reference signal. In par 0131, LI teaches) (par 0127-0134); or
measure a first sidelink positioning reference signal received via the transceiver from a third user equipment separate from the first user equipment, the first sidelink positioning reference signal having a first sidelink channel configuration; or
send a second sidelink positioning reference signal via the transceiver to a fourth user equipment separate from the first user equipment, the second sidelink positioning reference signal having a second sidelink channel configuration.
LI also disclose “a non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium” as recited in claim 31 (par 0210, 0228, 0238, 0240).
Regarding claims 6, 16, 26 and 36:
LI further discloses send the second sidelink positioning reference signal (see step 4 in figure 4); receive positioning information, from the transceiver, received by the transceiver from another user equipment (see UE in figure 4) via a sidelink channel (see steps 3-4 in figure 4); and send the positioning information to a network entity (see base station in figure 4) (see step 6 in figure 4).
Regarding claims 9, 19, 29 and 39:
LI further discloses measure the first sidelink positioning reference signal (see steps 5-6 in figure 4); determine positioning information from the first sidelink positioning reference signal (see steps 5-6 in figure 4); and send the positioning information to a network entity via the transceiver (see base station in figure 4) (see step 6 in figure 4).
Regarding claims 10, 20, 30 and 40:
LI further discloses wherein the processor is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal associated with at least one of a user equipment identification (par 0017, 0032, 0055), corresponding to the first user equipment, or a cell identification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Claims 2-5, 12-15, 22-25 and 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LI in view of Baek et al. (US 20220416976) (hereinafter Baek).
Regarding claims 2, 12, 22 and 32:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the processor is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal with an uplink positioning reference signal format, a downlink positioning reference signal format, a sidelink synchronization signal format, a sidelink channel state information reference signal format, a sidelink phase tracking reference signal format, or a sidelink demodulation reference signal format.
However, Baek in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal with an uplink positioning reference signal format, a downlink positioning reference signal format, a sidelink synchronization signal format (par 0087-0090), a sidelink channel state information reference signal format, a sidelink phase tracking reference signal format, or a sidelink demodulation reference signal format. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sidelink synchronization signal format as taught by Baek to modify the system and method of LI in order to detect a synchronization signal ID of the system (par 0088) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claims 3, 13, 23 and 33:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the processor is configured to measure the first sidelink positioning reference signal with the first sidelink positioning reference signal having an uplink positioning reference signal format, a downlink positioning reference signal format, a sidelink synchronization signal format, a sidelink channel state information reference signal format, a sidelink phase tracking reference signal format, or a sidelink demodulation reference signal format.
However, Baek in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is configured to measure the first sidelink positioning reference signal with the first sidelink positioning reference signal having an uplink positioning reference signal format, a downlink positioning reference signal format, a sidelink synchronization signal format, a sidelink channel state information reference signal format (par 0130), a sidelink phase tracking reference signal format, or a sidelink demodulation reference signal format. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sidelink channel state information reference signal (SL CSI) as taught by Baek to modify the system and method of LI in order to channel quality information for the system (par 0130) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claims 4, 14, 24 and 34:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the processor is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal with at least one of resource repetition or beam sweeping.
However, Baek in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor (102 in figure 21) is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal with at least one of resource repetition (par 0180-0192) or beam sweeping. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sidelink positioning reference signal resource allocation as taught by Baek to modify the system and method of LI in order to efficiently use PSFCH resources of the system (par 0034) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claims 5, 15, 25 and 35:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the processor is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal and to implement signal muting on the second sidelink positioning reference signal.
However, Baek in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor (102 in figure 21) is configured to send the second sidelink positioning reference signal and to implement signal muting (off interpreted to be muting. Par 0177-0178) on the second sidelink positioning reference signal (par 0177-0178, 0182-0190). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sidelink positioning reference signal resource allocation as taught by Baek to modify the system and method of LI in order to efficiently use PSFCH resources of the system (par 0034) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
15. Claims 7-8, 17-18, 27-28 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LI in view of REN et al. (US 20220407639) (hereinafter REN).
Regarding claims 7, 17, 27 and 37:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the processor is configured to receive assistance data from the transceiver and is configured to at least one of measure the first sidelink positioning reference signal based on the assistance data or measure the uplink positioning reference signal based on the assistance data.
However, REN in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is configured to receive assistance data from the transceiver (see step 4 in figure 2) and is configured to at least one of measure the first sidelink positioning reference signal based on the assistance data or measure the uplink positioning reference signal based on the assistance data (par 0007-0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use assistance data as taught by REN to modify the system and method of LI in order to obtain positioning measurements (par 0012) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claims 8, 18, 28 and 38:
LI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the assistance data comprise an expected reference signal time difference value and an uncertainty of the expected reference signal time difference value corresponding to the first sidelink positioning reference signal or the uplink positioning reference signal.
However, REN in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the assistance data comprise an expected reference signal time difference value and an uncertainty of the expected reference signal time difference value (see Observed Time Difference Of Arrival (OTDOA) in par 0003-0012) corresponding to the first sidelink positioning reference signal or the uplink positioning reference signal (par 0007-0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use assistance data as taught by REN to modify the system and method of LI in order to obtain positioning measurements (par 0012) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whose telephone number is (571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
17. 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.
/KABIR A TIMORY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631