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 .
Election/Restriction
Claims 7-11 and 18-19, and 25 (Group II) previously withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a non-elected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/19/2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claims have priority date of 10/07/2021.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/9/2026 has been entered.
No claims are amended, added, or canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant provides a numbered version of claim 1 with features marked a through g for discussion purposes.
Applicant submits that Henry in combination with Da fails to disclose features a – e of claim 1, specifically the features:
PNG
media_image1.png
402
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding applicant’s argument on (a), examiner notes that the label “master” attached to a base station does not patentably distinguish it from a peer access point or interior/edge access point as disclosed in Henry. Here, the access points in Henry perform the same functions attributed to the master base station in the claim.
Regarding applicant’s argument on (b), the examiner notes the updated rejection teaches this limitation by Henri in combination with Da (¶27 “the reference signals may be transmitted at a predetermined time (measured at the transmitting base station) or they may include a timestamp that indicates the transmission time at the transmitting base station.”)
Regarding (c) through (d), examiner notes that remarks are moot since updated rejection associates first, second, and third messages with the ranging data of Henri ([0062] “..a plurality of access points 104 exchanging ranging data RD between neighbor access points 104..”, [0027]).
Regarding (e), examiner notes that in this case first, second, and third messages are taught by “ranging data” of Henri and there is no rule or claim limitation that precludes that reading since the content of the first, second, and third messages is similar and taught generally by the ranging data exchange messages of Henri in combination with Da as cited. See Henri ([0062] “..a plurality of access points 104 exchanging ranging data RD between neighbor access points 104..”, [0027]).
In response to applicant's argument that Da is nonanalogous art, ( i.e. Da is directed to synchronizing and Henry to localizing, or that Da discloses aX2-AP interface) it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, applicant’s not persuasive because the base station/device in DA are also wireless as shown in Fig.1 with wireless links 130, 135, 155, 160. Further Da also investigates determining location of the user equipment (Da ¶4 For example, the Observed Time Difference Of Arrival (OTDOA) technique uses the difference in arrival times of position reference signals (PRSs) transmitted by multiple base stations to a user equipment to estimate the location of the user equipment by multilateration). It is commonly known that “user equipment” may also serve as an access point i.e. hot spot.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill would modify Henri, to include the noted teachings of Da in order to generate an improved estimate of the timing offset (Da [0051]).
The rejection is thus maintained to parts are updated to correct minor deficiencies in the previous rejection. Rejection is non-final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-2,4-6,12-13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210227489 A1 Henry; Jerome et al. in view of US 20160302165 A1 Da; Ren et al.
Consider Claims 1 and 12
Henry teaches A base station apparatus (Fig. 1 104 AP1, AP2 etc.; [0030] “..process of determining the location-related data for at least some of the access points 104 in the geographic area 102..”) comprising:
a memory configured to store an initial planned location of the base station apparatus (Fig. 2, [0044] “..the computer system(s) 202 may include, and/or access, a data store 230. The data store 230 may include a file store including data associated with one or more of the access points 104, data associated with the locations of the one or more access points 104..”);
- a transceiver ([0039] “..respective transceivers associated with the access points 104..”) configured to
receive first messages from a master base station (Fig. 8, [0062] “..a plurality of access points 104 exchanging ranging data RD between neighbor access points 104..”), each first message comprising a first timestamp indicating a transmission time of the first message ([0016] “..The ranging data may be based at least in part on at least one of fine timing measurements or time-of-flight-based measurements.”, Fig. 7, [0059] “..the ranging data RD1 and RD2 includes confidence levels and timestamps associated with the respective ranging data. ..”; Examiner also notes that transmitting time-stamps
information is part of the FTM protocol and a common measure in frame of the exchange of messages for ranging). and
to transmit second messages (, [0062] “..a plurality of access points 104 exchanging ranging data RD between neighbor access points 104..”), each second message comprising
a second timestamp indicating a transmission time of the second message (Fig. 7, [0059] “..the ranging data RD1 and RD2 includes confidence levels and timestamps associated with the respective ranging data. ..”) and
a location estimate of the base station apparatus ([0035] “..ranging data may include one or more of locations of the neighbor access points, relative locations between neighbor access points, or confidence levels associated with the relative locations between the respective neighbor access points..”),
to receive second messages from peer base station apparatuses ([0027] “..exchanging ranging data and location-related data between neighboring access point..”; [0062] “..a plurality of access points 104 exchanging ranging data RD between neighbor access points 104..”), and
to receive third messages from the master base station ([0027] “..exchanging ranging data and location-related data between neighboring access point..”; ¶62), wherein the third message comprises timestamps indicating for each second message of a current iteration of an iterative process, a point in time (Fig. 7, [0059] “..the ranging data RD1 and RD2 includes confidence levels and timestamps associated with the respective ranging data. ..”)
at least one processing core configured to determine a location of the base station apparatus by performing the iterative process (Fig. 8, [0062] “..process 804 may also include, over time, exchanging additional ranging data indicative of additional relative distances between at least some pairs of the plurality of access points 104, and determining, based at least in part on the additional ranging data and/or the additional location-related data, updated location-related data for at least some of the access points..”; [0063] “..as repeated ranging data exchanges take place..”),
wherein each iteration comprises:
- determining an updated location estimate of the base station apparatus based on a received first message, received at least one second message and a received third message (Fig. 8, [0062]-[0063] “..process 804 for updating location-related data associated with at least some of the access points 104 based on the exchange of ranging data RD..”), and
- determining a quality criterion of the updated location estimate of the base station apparatus ([0039] “..a confidence level component 220 configured to determine confidence levels associated with the location-related data associated with the access points 104..”).
Henry does not teach the timestamps [in third message] indicate a point in time when the master base station received the respective second message, wherein one of the first message or the third message comprises a location estimate of the master base station.
Da TEACHES [the first and second] timestamp[s] indicating a transmission time of the first message (¶27 “the reference signals may be transmitted at a predetermined time (measured at the transmitting base station) or they may include a timestamp that indicates the transmission time at the transmitting base station”)
Da (See: Fig. 4, [0051] For example, the second base station may provide information indicating its location to the first base station. The information indicating the timing offsets and location information (if provided) can be transmitted over an interface (such as an X2-AP interface) between the two base stations. The interface may support information elements that convey a base station identifier, a timestamp indicating when the measurement of the timing offset was obtained, the timing offset measurement, and, in some embodiments, information indicating the location of the base station. The first base station may use the first and second timing offsets, as well as location information (if provided), to generate an improved estimate of the timing offset, as discussed herein.; See also [0028]) further teaches wherein the third message comprises timestamps indicating for each second message of a current iteration of an iterative process, a point in time when the master base station received the respective second message (“a timestamp indicating when the measurement of the timing offset was obtained”), wherein one of the first message or the third message comprises a location estimate of the master base station (‘location information’).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the invention of Henry to include the noted teachings of Da in order to generate an improved estimate of the timing offset (Da [0051]).
Consider Claims 2 and 13
Henry teaches The base station apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the base station apparatus is configured to determine the updated location estimate further based on a ratio between a first time delay and a second time delay, the first time delay elapsing between transmission of the first message from the master base station and transmission of the third message from the master base station, and the second time delay being obtained by subtracting from a time of receipt of the second message in the master base station the time of transmission of the first message from the master base station and a time-of-flight between the base station apparatus and the master base station ([0016] “..Determining the first interior location-related data for the first interior access point may include exchanging ranging data indicative of a first relative distance between the first edge access point and the first interior access point. The ranging data may be based at least in part on at least one of fine timing measurements or time-of-flight-based measurements..” where well known that FTM and time-of-flight protocols as disclosed are based on time of flight and time between messages).
Consider Claims 4 and 15
Henry teaches The base station apparatus according to claims 1, wherein the third message comprises a timestamp indicating a point in time, when the master base station transmitted the third message ([0016] “..Determining the first interior location-related data for the first interior access point may include exchanging ranging data indicative of a first relative distance between the first edge access point and the first interior access point. The ranging data may be based at least in part on at least one of fine timing measurements or time-of-flight-based measurements..” timestamp is part of the FTM protocol and further inherent part of time-of-flight positioning ).
Consider Claims 5 and 16
5. The base station apparatus according to claims 1, wherein the quality criterion is proportional to a change in the updated location estimate of the base station apparatus with respect to an immediately preceding iteration of the iterative process ([0063] “..as repeated ranging data exchanges take place between the stations 106 and the access points 104 and/or between neighboring access points 104, the accuracy of the location-related data for each access point pair of the exchanges may also increase…” thus proportional)., and
the at least one processing core is configured to stop the iterative process responsive to the change being below a threshold ([0063] “.. In some examples, once the confidence levels for an access point pair reaches a threshold confidence level, access points that include LCI may be caused to skip the ranging exchange with access points that also have an LCI associated with a high confidence level…” where confidence is a measure of accuracy thus responsive to change and a high threshold of confidence is equivalent to low threshold of change).
Consider Claims 6 and 17
Henry teaches The base station apparatus according to claims 1,
wherein the base station apparatus is configured as a non-master base station apparatus ([0030] “..a plurality of access points 104 (e.g., AP1, AP2, AP3, . . . APn)..”), and
is further configured to determine a distance from the base station apparatus to another non-master base station apparatus based on timing values of the first, second and third messages ([0021] “..determining the first interior location-related data for the first interior access point may include exchanging ranging data indicative of a first relative distance between the first edge access point and the first interior access point..”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UMAIR AHSAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1323. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-5 PM EST or by emailing UMAIR.AHSAN@USPTO.GOV.
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 at (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 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.
UMAIR AHSAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/UMAIR AHSAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647