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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on August 21, 2026 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhatti et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2018/0115439) in view of Ryden et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0217918).
Regarding claim 1, Bhatti et al discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) (fig. 1 [102B]) for supporting a positioning session for the UE comprising: selecting a path delay detection algorithm from a plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE to determine a path delay of one or more positioning signals received by the UE (see at least paragraph 34 discloses that multipath detection used to facilitate selection of time-of-arrival estimation algorithm from detected multiple paths); performing measurements of the one or more positioning signals using the selected path delay detection algorithm (see at least paragraph 34 discloses a time of arrival estimation algorithm that tolerates multipath environment is utilized).
Bhatti et al fails to explicitly disclose receiving a location information request from a location server; and reporting location information to the location server, wherein the location information includes information based on the measurements and the selected path delay detection algorithm. However, in the same field of endeavor, Ryden et al discloses receiving a location information request from a location server (see at least fig. 12 [122] receiving request from location server); and reporting location information to the location server, wherein the location information includes information based on the measurements and the selected path delay detection algorithm reporting location information to the location server (see at least fig. 12 [126] sending[reporting] location measurement to location server). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify to incorporate above mention feature as taught by Ryden et al into the system of Bhatti et al, for purpose of sending location measurements using multipath RSTD to the location server; efficiently assist the UE.
Regarding claim 2, Ryden et al discloses determining one or more classes of the plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE, wherein each class comprises a set of requirements and performance guarantees; receiving a request for capabilities from the location server; and transmitting, to the location server, a capability report indicating the one or more classes of the plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE (see at least fig. 12 [121]). Same motivation as claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Bhatti et al discloses the set of requirements and performance guarantees comprises at least one of a length of a required measurement gap, a reporting timeline, accuracy requirements, resources per slot that can be processed, number of hyper parameter combinations, output parameters, or any combination thereof (see at least paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 4, Bhatti et al discloses the selected path delay detection algorithm is selected based on channel conditions associated with the UE (see at least paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 5, Bhatti et al discloses the channel conditions include a volume of transmit and receive traffic at the UE, or a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurement of positioning signals received from a base station (see at least paragraph 51).
Regarding claim 6, Bhatti et al discloses the selecting the selected path delay detection algorithm includes receiving a message from the location server directing the UE to select a class of path delay detection algorithm (see at least paragraph 51).
Regarding claim 7, Bhatti et al discloses performing measurements of the one or more positioning signals using the selected path delay detection algorithm comprises: determining an error estimate associated with the measurements; and selecting a different path delay detection algorithm in response to the determined error estimate (see at least paragraph 51).
Regarding claim 8, Bhatti et al discloses performing measurements of the one or more positioning signals using the selected path delay detection algorithm comprises identifying a line-of-sight positioning signal and rejecting multipath positioning signals (see at least paragraph 51).
Regarding claim 9, Bhatti et al discloses the selected path delay detection algorithm includes a peak detection algorithm, a super-resolution algorithm, an iterative least-square algorithm, a neural network based algorithm, or a combination thereof (see at least paragraph 51).
Regarding claim 10, Bhatti et al discloses a user equipment (UE) configured for supporting a positioning session, comprising: a wireless transceiver; at least one memory; at least one processor coupled to the wireless transceiver and the at least one memory, the at least one processor configured to:
select a path delay detection algorithm from a plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE to determine a path delay of one or more positioning signals received by the UE (see at least paragraph 34 discloses that multipath detection used to facilitate selection of time-of-arrival estimation algorithm from detected multiple paths);
perform measurements of the one or more positioning signals using the selected path delay detection algorithm (see at least paragraph 34 discloses a time of arrival estimation algorithm that tolerates multipath environment is utilized).
Bhatti et al fails to explicitly disclose receive, via the wireless transceiver, a location information request from a location server; and report, via the wireless transceiver, location information, wherein the location information includes information based on the measurements and the selected path delay detection algorithm. However, in the same field of endeavor, Ryden et al (CN109891260A or WO 2018083610 or US 2020/0217918) discloses receive, via the wireless transceiver, a location information request from a location server (see at least fig. 12 [122] receiving request from location server); and report, via the wireless transceiver, location information, wherein the location information includes information based on the measurements and the selected path delay detection algorithm (see at least fig. 12 [126] sending[reporting] location measurement to location server). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify to incorporate above mention feature as taught by Ryden et al into the system of Bhatti et al, for purpose of sending location measurements using multipath RSTD to the location server; efficiently assist the UE.
Regarding claims 11-18, see above rejection of claims 2-9.
Regarding claim 19, Bhatti et al discloses a method performed by a location server for supporting a positioning session for a user equipment (UE) comprising: wherein the location information response comprises a path delay detection algorithm selected by the UE from a plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE to determine a path delay of one or more positioning signals received by the UE and comprises location information based on measurements of the one or more positioning signals performed by the UE (see at least paragraph 34 discloses that multipath detection used to facilitate selection of time-of-arrival estimation algorithm from detected multiple paths); and determining or verifying a location of the UE based on the path delay detection algorithm selected by the UE and the location information (see at least paragraph 34 discloses a time of arrival estimation algorithm that tolerates multipath environment is utilized).
Bhatti et al fails to explicitly disclose sending, to the UE, a location information request; and receiving a location information response from the UE. However, in the same field of endeavor, Ryden et al discloses sending, to the UE, a location information request (see at least fig. 12 [122] receiving request from location server); and receiving a location information response from the UE (see at least fig. 12 [126] sending[reporting] location measurement to location server). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify to incorporate above mention feature as taught by Ryden et al into the system of Bhatti et al, for purpose of sending location measurements using multipath RSTD to the location server; efficiently assist the UE.
Regarding claims 20-24, see above rejection of claims 2-3, 6, 8 and 9.
Regarding claim 25, Bhatti et al discloses a location server configured for supporting a positioning session for a user equipment (UE) comprising: a communications interface; at least one memory; at least one processor coupled to the communications interface and the at least one memory, the at least one processor configured to: wherein the location information response comprises a path delay detection algorithm selected by the UE from a plurality of path delay detection algorithms supported by the UE to determine a path delay of one or more positioning signals received by the UE and comprises location information based on measurements of the one or more positioning signals performed by the UE (see at least paragraph 34 discloses that multipath detection used to facilitate selection of time-of-arrival estimation algorithm from detected multiple paths); and determining or verifying a location of the UE based on the path delay detection algorithm selected by the UE and the location information (see at least paragraph 34 discloses a time of arrival estimation algorithm that tolerates multipath environment is utilized).
Bhatti et al fails to explicitly disclose sending the UE, via the communication interface, a location information request; and receiving, via the communication interface, a location information response from the UE. However, in the same field of endeavor, Ryden et al discloses sending the UE, via the communication interface, a location information request (see at least fig. 12 [122] receiving request from location server); and receiving, via the communication interface, a location information response from the UE (see at least fig. 12 [126] sending[reporting] location measurement to location server). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify to incorporate above mention feature as taught by Ryden et al into the system of Bhatti et al, for purpose of sending location measurements using multipath RSTD to the location server; efficiently assist the UE.
Regarding claims 26-30, see above rejection of claims 2-3, 6, 8 and 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LITON MIAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3124. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 7:30am -5:00pm.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 571-272-7915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LITON MIAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights