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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a non-Final office action in merits. Claims 2-3, and 28 are canceled. Claims 1, 3-27, 29-40, after amendment, are presently pending and have been elected and considered below.
Request for Continued Examination
The request for a continued prosecution application (CPA) under 37 CFR 1.53(d) filed on 3/17/2026 is acknowledged. A CPA may only be filed in a design application filed under 35 U.S.C. chapter 16. See 37 CFR 1.53(d)(1). Since a CPA of this application is not permitted under 37 CFR 1.53(d)(1), the improper request for a CPA is being treated as a request for continued examination of this application under 37 CFR 1.114.
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. IN202041045027, filed on 10/16/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/3/2023 and 11/25/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 4-27, 29-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0262648 A1, Thomas et al. (hereinafter Thomas) in view of US 2022/0110085 A1, KHORYAEV et al. (hereinafter KHORYAEV).
As to claim 1, Thomas discloses a method of wireless positioning performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
engaging in a positioning procedure with a location server (Figs 1, 3-4, 14, 18; pars 0005, 0008, 0045, performing energy efficient positioning procedure including positioning measurement with a location server), wherein the positioning procedure is associated with at least one power consumption parameter (pars 0083, 0190, 0193, power consumption), at least one latency requirement parameter (pars 0048, 0190, latency requirement), at least one accuracy requirement parameter (par 0048, accuracy requirement), or a combination thereof (pars 0047, 0096, 0120, TABLE 1);
transmitting a recommendation to a network entity to transition to or remain in a first radio resource control (RRC) state for the positioning procedure (Figs 6-7, UE sending RRCSetupRequest to NG-RAN for setting up RRC state or RRCResumeRequest to gNB, a network entity, for resuming the UE’s RRC state; pars 0108, 00111-0117), wherein the recommendation is based on a determination that power consumption, latency, accuracy, or a combination thereof of the UE when in the first RRC state meet the at least one power consumption parameter, the at least one latency requirement parameter, the at least one accuracy requirement parameter, or the combination thereof for the positioning procedure (UE shall perform positioning procedures as configured and defined by the performance parameters);
receiving, in response to the recommendation, a configuration from the network entity to transition to or remain in the first RRC state (Figs 6-8, 0-11A, 14A, 18; UE receiving RRCSetup (e.g. RRC configuration) from NG-RAN; pars 0108-0110, 0113-0118);
transitioning to or remaining in the first RRC state to perform the positioning procedure based on the configuration (Figs 5-7, 10-11, 14B, 18; pars 0005, 0053-0054, 0085, 0102-0110, 0113-0115); and
performing one or more positioning operations associated with the positioning procedure while in the first RRC state (Figs 5-7, 10-11, 14B, 18; pars 0005, 0053-0054, 0085, 0102-0108, 0113-0115, performing positioning measurement based on the configured RRC state).
Thomas discloses at least one power consumption, latency requirements, accuracy requirement and/or constraints being associated the positioning procedure to maintain and assure positioning quality.
Nevertheless, KHORYAEV, in the same or similar field of endeavor, additionally teaches the positioning procedure is associated with at least one power consumption parameter (Figs 6-7, maximum RSRP power requirement; pars 0044, 0048, 0074, 0237, reduced power consumption requirement), at least one latency requirement parameter (pars 0044, 0047, 0058, 0087, 0127, 0237, low latency requirement), at least one accuracy requirement parameter (pars 0058, 0237, accuracy levels), or a combination thereof, and the recommendation is based on a determination that power consumption, latency, accuracy, or a combination thereof of the UE when in the first RRC state meet the at least one power consumption parameter, the at least one latency requirement parameter, the at least one accuracy requirement parameter, or the combination thereof for the positioning procedure (Figs 6-7; pars 0047-0048, 0053, 0058, 0074-0076, 0163, 0237, note above requirements as QoS requirements for positioning procedure being embedded in PUSCH message and positioning associated signaling protocol),
Therefore, consider Thomas and KHORYAEV’s teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the filing date of invention to incorporate KHORYAEV’s teachings in Thomas’s method to assure the positioning procedure meeting predefined quality requirements.
2-3. (Canceled)
As to claim 4, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the recommendation includes a power state of the UE (Thomas: Fig 19, indication of the power mode the UE operates on; pars 0006, 0085, 0190), an amount of power consumption available to the UE, or both (Thomas: pars 0053, 0191, 0245, 0262, battery level available to the UE).
As to claim 5, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, to the location server, a report comprising results of the one or more positioning operations (Thomas: Figs 1, 11B, 18, a report comprising UE RRC state-aware measurement results being transmitted to LMF, a location server).
As to claim 6, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: transitioning to a second RRC state after performing the one or more positioning operations and before transmitting the report (Thomas: Figs 10, 11A, UE RRC state being transitioned from RRC_IDLE/RRC_INACTIVE to RRC_CONNECTED after network triggered service request and positioning measurement configuration or from RRC_CONNECTED to RRC_IDLE/RRC_INACTIVE after RRC DL information transfer, a part of positioning operations).
As to claim 7, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: transitioning to the first RRC state from a second RRC state, wherein: the second RRC state is an RRC idle state and the first RRC state is the RRC idle state, an RRC inactive state, or an RRC connected state (Thomas: Fig 10, UE transits from RRC_IDLE/RRC_INACTIVE to RRC_CONNECTED),
the second RRC state is the RRC inactive state and the first RRC state is the RRC inactive state or the RRC connected state, the second RRC state is the RRC connected state and the first RRC state is the RRC connected state (Thomas: Fig 11A, UE transits from RRC_CONNECTED to RRC_IDLE/RRC_INACTIVE), or
the second RRC state is one of the RRC connected state or the RRC idle state, the first RRC state is the RRC inactive state, and the one or more positioning operations include transmitting one or more uplink positioning reference signals (Thomas: Figs 10-11A).
As to claim 8, Thomas as modified discloses a method of communication performed by a base station, comprising: receiving a recommendation for a user equipment (UE) to transition to or remain in a first radio resource control (RRC) state for a positioning procedure between the UE and a location server (Thomas: Figs 1, 3, 5-7, 10-11; pars 0047, 0064, 0076; and configuring the UE to transition to or remain in the first RRC state for a duration of the positioning procedure (Thomas: Figs 5-7, 10-11, 14B, 18; pars 0005, 0053-0054, 0085, 0102-0108).
As to claim 9, see rejection in claim 8.
As to claim 10, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the at least one latency requirement parameter comprises a latency mode for the positioning procedure (Thomas: Table 1, different latency (modes) for position estimation of UE indicated in the table correspond to different scenarios), a response time for the positioning procedure (Thomas: pars 0052, 0065, 0090-0091), a start time, an end time, or both for the positioning procedure (Thomas: pars 0090-0091), a quality of service (QoS) parameter for the positioning procedure (Thomas: pars 0062-0063, 0068, 0079; KHORYAEV: Figs 6-7; pars 0047-0048, 0053, 0058, 0074-0076, 0163, 0237), or any combination thereof.
As to claim 11, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the latency mode is one of low, medium, or high (Thomas: TABLE 1; pars 0049, 0055, 0120-0124, also see rejection in claim 10).
As to claim 12, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the at least one power consumption parameter comprises a power consumption mode for the positioning procedure (Thomas: Fig 15, message containing reduced power indication (e.g. reduced power consumption mode; Fig 19; pars 0006, 0085), a QoS parameter for the positioning procedure (Thomas: TABLE 1, positioning accuracy parameters; pars 0052, 0063), a power consumption type of the positioning procedure (Thomas: Figs 15, 19, power consumption mode or type), or any combination thereof.
As to claim 13, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 12, wherein: the power consumption mode is one of low, medium, or high (Thomas: Figs 15, 19, pars 0006, 0050, 0083, 0085, 0190), the power consumption type is one of a high-power consumption positioning procedure or a low-power consumption positioning procedure (Thomas: Figs 15, 19; pars 0006, 0024, 0047, reduced power type/mode associated with reduced power positioning procedure; pars 0048-0050, 0052-0053, 0055, additional non-connected states positioning procedures with lower power consumption), or any combination thereof. Note various positioning procedures aiming at efficient power consumption operations have been taught in Thomas, including in RRC_CONNECTED state, non-connected state, such as RRC_IDLE or RRC_INACTIVE state, as well DTX transmission, as well as power consumption modes/types associated with the various positioning procedure. Consider Thomas’s teachings as a whole, an ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the power consumption modes or power consumption types here are essentially exchangeable concepts and whether two types or three modes are matter of design choices to facilitate positioning measurement operation and procedures under different scenarios, RATs, and/or applications.
As to claim 14, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the at least one accuracy requirement parameter comprises a QoS parameter specifying an accuracy requirement for the positioning procedure (Thomas: TABLE 1; KHORYAEV: Figs 6-7; pars 0047-0048, 0053, 0058, 0074-0076, 0163, 0237).
As to claim 15, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the recommendation is received from: the UE in one or more uplink control information (UCI) messages (Thomas: Fig 11B: 8; Fig 15: 3; pars 0059, 0094), one or more RRC messages (Thomas: Fig 6, RRCSetupRequest), or one or more medium access control control element (MAC-CE) messages (par 0169), or the location server in one or more New Radio positioning protocol type A (NRPPa) messages (Fig 9) or one or more LTE positioning protocol type A (LPPa) messages (Thomas: Fig 10).
As to claim 16, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
As to claim 17, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: configuring the UE to transition to a second RRC state only after completion of the positioning procedure (Thomas: Figs 14A-14B, UE in RRC_CONNECTED state (1425) and transits to RRC_IDLE/INACTIVE state (1460) after positioning measurement).
As to claim 18, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: refraining from configuring the UE to transition to a second RRC state during the positioning procedure regardless of expiration of any RRC inactive state or RRC idle state timers (Thomas: Figs 14A-B, UE being in RRC_CONNECTED, CM_ CONNECTED state until the positioning procedure is completed, not depending on any timer for state transition).
As to claim 19, it recites similar limitations as claim 7. Rejection of claim 7 is incorporated herein.
As to claim 20, Thomas as modified discloses a method of communication performed by a location server (Thomas: Figs 3-4), comprising: engaging in a positioning procedure with a user equipment (UE) (Thomas: Figs 10-11); and transmitting, to a base station serving the UE, a recommendation for the UE to transition to or remain in a first radio resource control (RRC) state (Thomas: Figs 10-11, LMF (local server) sending LPP message to NG-RAN to instruct the UE to either stays in RRC_CONNECTED state or RRC_IDLE/RRC_INACTIVE state).
As to claim 21, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 9.
As to claim 22, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 10.
As to claim 23, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 12.
As to claim 24, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 14.
As to claim 25, Thomas as modified discloses the method of claim 20, receiving the recommendation from: the UE in one or more Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages (Thomas: Fig 11B), or the base station in one or more New Radio positioning protocol type A (NRPPa) (Fig 9; par 0129) or LPP type A (LPPa) messages (Thomas: Fig 10).
As to claim 26, Thomas discloses the method of claim 20, further comprising: receiving, from the UE, a report comprising results of the positioning procedure (Thomas: Figs 11B, 14B).
As to claim 27, it is a device claim encompassed claim 1. Rejection of claim 1 is therefore incorporated herein.
28. (Canceled)
As to claim 29, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
As to claim 30, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
As to claim 31, it is an apparatus (base station) claim encompassed claim 8. Rejection of claim 8 is therefore incorporated herein.
As to claim 32, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 9.
As to claim 33, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 10.
As to claim 34, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 12.
As to claim 35, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 16.
As to claim 36, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
As to claim 37, it is an apparatus (location server) claim encompassed claim 20. Rejection of claim 20 is therefore incorporated herein.
As to claim 38, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 21.
As to claim 39, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 22.
As to claim 40, it is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 23.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but they are moot in light of new ground of rejection.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular column, line number, paragraphs and/or figure(s) in the reference(s) as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the reference(s) in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUN SHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7927. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5:50 PT.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on 571-272-3382. 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.
/QUN SHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662