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 .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 12/10/2025, with respect to claims 57, 62-63, 67, 70, 73 and 78 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The last non-final rejection of claims 57, 63, 67, 70 and 73 has been withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant’s election without traverse of group 1 (claims 57-70 and 73-78) in the reply filed on 07/08/2025 is acknowledged.
4. 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
5. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claim 73 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US 20150249527) (hereinafter Hwang).
Regarding claim 73:
As shown in figures 1-9, Hwang discloses a first device (202 in figure 2) method comprising:
receiving (106 in figure 1, 212 in figure 2), at a first device (102 in figure 1, 202 in figure 2) and from a second device (101 in figure 1, 201 in figure 2) an indication that a Sounding Reference Signal, SRS, is to be used for a positioning process of the first device unless a further indication is received (abstract, par 0023-0026, claim 1); and
transmitting (107 in figure 1, 216 in figure 2) a SRS to a third device (105 in figure 1, 205 in figure 2), the third device (105 in figure 1, 205 in figure 2) being responsible for measuring a position of the first device in the positioning process (abstract, par 0023-0026, claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claim 78 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Guo et al. (US 20220182199) (hereinafter Guo).
Regarding claims 78:
Hwang further discloses wherein the SRS is transmitted to a fourth device (see 213 in figure 2).
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching and resources on which the SRS is transmitted is to be muted by the fourth device.
However, Guo in the same field of endeavor teaches and resources on which the SRS is transmitted is to be muted by the fourth device (par 0055, 0112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use muted SRS resources as taught by Guo to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to reduce power consumption by transmitting zero power on symbols and SRS transmission period (par 0055) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
10. Claims 57, 63, 67 and 70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of MANOLAKOS et al. (US 20230097008) (hereinafter MANOLAKOS).
Regarding claim 57:
As shown in figures 1-9, Hwang discloses a first device (102 in figure 1, 202 in figure 2) comprising:
cause the first device (102 in figure 1, 202 in figure 2) at least to:
receive (106 in figure 1, 212 in figure 2) from a second device (101 in figure 1, 201 in figure 2) an indication that a Sounding Reference Signal, SRS, is to be used for a positioning process of the first device unless a further indication is received (abstract, par 0023-0026, claim 1); and
transmit (107 in figure 1, 216 in figure 2) the SRS to a third device (105 in figure 1, 205 in figure 2), the third device (105 in figure 1, 205 in figure 2) being responsible for measuring a position of the first device in the positioning process (abstract, par 0023-0026, claim 1).
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor.
However, MANOLAKOS in the same field of endeavor teaches at least one processor (750 in figure 7); and at least one memory (754 in figure 37 including computer program code (par 0094-0095); the at least one memory (754 in figure 7) and the computer program code (par 0094-0095) are configured to, with the at least one processor (754 in figure 7) (par 0094-0095). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the computing system as taught by MANOLAKOS to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to perform various functions of the invention (par 0055) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claim 63:
As shown in figures 1-9, Hwang discloses a second device (170-3 in figure 4) comprising:
cause the second device at least to:
in accordance with a determination of a low power consumption requirement (see amplitude and power scaling in par 0041) at a first device (110-1 in figure 4) (abstract, par 0150-0151, 0162), generate an indication that a Sounding Reference Signal, SRS, is to be used for a positioning process of the first device (110-1 in figure 4) unless a further indication is received (abstract, par 0128, 0140, 0138-0149); and
transmit (see step 2 in figure 4) the indication to the first device (110-1 in figure 4) (par 0138-0149).
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor.
However, MANOLAKOS in the same field of endeavor teaches at least one processor (310 in figure 3); and at least one memory (311 in figure 3) including computer program code (312 in figure 3); the at least one memory (311 in figure 3) and the computer program code (312 in figure 3) are configured to, with the at least one processor (310 in figure 3) (par 0055-0057). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the computing system as taught by MANOLAKOS to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to perform various functions of the invention (par 0055) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claim 67:
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the second device is further caused to: obtain the configuration information from a fifth device serving the first device via a new radio positioning protocol signaling A.
However, MANOLAKOS in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the second device (120 in figure 1) is further caused to: obtain the configuration information from a fifth device (121 in figure 1) serving the first device (112 in figure 1) via a new radio positioning protocol signaling A (0050, 0085). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the communication system as taught by MANOLAKOS to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to provide device-to-device communication (par 0042) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claim 70:
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching transmit the indication to a fifth device serving the first device, a third device and a fourth device, the third device being responsible for measuring a position of the first device in the positioning process.
However, MANOLAKOS in the same field of endeavor teaches transmit the indication to a fifth device (121 in figure 1) serving the first device (112 in figure 1), a third device (143 in figure 1) and a fourth device (114 in figure 1), the third device (143 in figure 1) being responsible for measuring a position of the first device in the positioning process (0036). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the communication system as taught by MANOLAKOS to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to provide device-to-device communication (par 0042) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
11. Claim 62 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of MANOLAKOS as applied to claim 57 above and further in view of Guo.
Regarding claims 62:
Hwang further discloses wherein the SRS is transmitted to a fourth device (see 213 in figure 2).
Hwang discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching and resources on which the SRS is transmitted is to be muted by the fourth device.
However, Guo in the same field of endeavor teaches and resources on which the SRS is transmitted is to be muted by the fourth device (par 0055, 0112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use muted SRS resources as taught by Guo to modify the system and method of Hwang in order to reduce power consumption by transmitting zero power on symbols and SRS transmission period (par 0055) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 58-61, 64-66, 68-69 and 74-77 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, Keating does not teach or suggest wherein the first device is further caused to: determine capability information about power consumption of the first device; and transmit a capability report to the second device based on the capability information.
The prior art of record, Keating also does not teach or suggest wherein the first device is further caused to: receive configuration information associated with SRS indicating a target SRS sequence associated with an index of the first device and a transmission occasion of the SRS.
The prior art of record, Keating also does not teach or suggest wherein the SRS is generated based on a SRS sequence associated with an index of the first device, the SRS sequence determined based on configuration information associated with SRS.
The prior art of record, Keating also does not teach or suggest wherein the first device is caused to transmit the SRS by: in accordance with a determination that the first device is to be hand over from a serving cell to a target cell, generating the SRS based on configuration information associated with SRS; determining a transmission occasion of the SRS based on the configuration information; and transmitting the SRS on the transmission occasion.
Conclusion
14. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang et al. (US 12063689) discloses a user equipment (UE) transmits reference signals for positioning while in Idle or Inactive state. While in a connected state, the UE may be pre-configured with Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) resource configuration including at least one of timing adjustment (TA) and an uplink (UL) transmission spatial filter. The UE transmits positioning SRS while in Idle or Inactive mode based on the pre-configuration. The TA and UL transmission spatial filter may be updated by a serving base station using control signals or a paging message received by the UE while in in Idle or Inactive mode. The validity of the TA and UL transmission spatial filter may be monitored using expiration timers or a relative position change threshold. The reference signals transmitted may be based on a UE may Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH), which is insensitive to TA changes. A long sequence PRACH may be used for improved positioning accuracy.
15. 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.
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
Prosecution Insights