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 .
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 allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 26, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley et al. (US 2020/0367020, Ansley hereafter) in view of Soliman et al. (WO 2006/119412, Soliman hereafter).
RE claim 1, Ansley discloses a method comprising: a transceiver device having a high power mode and a low power mode (Paragraph 69 discloses an adaptive movable access point system that operates in a low power mode and a high/normal power mode); making location information available, over a network, of the transceiver device to a database containing locations of active incumbent devices (Paragraphs 69 further discloses “The AP 505 may connect to a mobile application (e.g., application running at the external device 510), and the AP 505 may receive location information (e.g., GPS data/coordinates) from the external device 510. The AP 505 may output an AFC request to an AFC system 515, wherein the AFC request includes the location information. The AP 505 may receive an AFC response from the AFC system 515, wherein the response either approves or denies the AP request to operate within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power. “); obtaining, from the database, approval for the transceiver device to operate in the high power mode, based on the location information and the locations of the active incumbent devices (Paragraphs 69 further discloses “The AP 505 may connect to a mobile application (e.g., application running at the external device 510), and the AP 505 may receive location information (e.g., GPS data/coordinates) from the external device 510. The AP 505 may output an AFC request to an AFC system 515, wherein the AFC request includes the location information. The AP 505 may receive an AFC response from the AFC system 515, wherein the response either approves or denies the AP request to operate within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power. “. At least paragraph 34 further discloses “The AFC system 115 may include a database that contains pre-calculated exclusion zone data for one or more microwave paths. It should be understood that spectrum availability may be calculated upon request. The exclusion zone data may be updated at the database periodically (e.g., hourly, daily, etc.) or in response to an addition or deletion of data associated with a microwave path. Communications between a device and the AFC system 115 may be over wired or wireless links not in the 6 GHz band. The AFC system 115 and its database may be connected to a packet-based wide area network (e.g., wide area network (WAN) 120), including but not limited to the Internet. Each of one or more devices (e.g., AP 105) may register with the database. Initial registration and query may be made outside of the 6 GHz bands. In embodiments, each device (e.g., APs 105) may also register devices that are associated with the device (e.g., STAs (stations) 110, clients, etc.). Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device), an identification of the device type, identifying information (e.g., unique identifiers), and/or other information associated with the device. Based upon the query received from each respective one device, the database may determine a proximity of the respective device to one or more exclusion zones.” Though the term “incumbent” is not use, this is a description of a database of existing devise and their locations, where a new device is authorized to operate in a high/normal power mode based on the devices already in the database which establish exclusion zones for said high/normal power operation due the likelihood of interference.); and operating the transceiver device in the high power mode, responsive to obtaining the approval (Paragraph 69 further discloses “If the AFC response approves the AP's use of the 6 GHz band, the AP 505 may switch to operating within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power levels (e.g., 1 W).”).
Ansley does not explicitly disclose storing geographic location information in a memory portion of a tag device; affixing the tag device on a fixed surface; and reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device.
However, Soliman teaches storing geographic location information in a memory portion of a tag device (Paragraphs 59-60 teaches a geolocation system, in this case utilized by a user equipment, based upon RFID tags spread throughout an office building wherein “location information stored in the tags may include latitude and longitude (lat/long), street address, floor, or room location, or any combination of these”.); affixing the tag device on a fixed surface (Paragraph 60 teaches the tags are pre-surveyed and placed in a fixed location); and reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device (Paragraph 61 teaches “As user equipment 420 comes within range of the tags 410, 412, 414, and 416, because the tags have been surveyed in and their confidence level is high, the user equipment may update its location.” Paragraph 50 further teaches a reader within the UE having an RF transponder, antenna, memory and a processor. The reader interacts with the tags as they come in proximity with one another.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley with the teachings of Soliman in order to provide for accurate geolocation for devices where GPS is inaccurate or unusable. Ansley explicitly states in paragraph 74 “a device might use an available service to determine its location in lieu of having the ability to determine its location through access to a GPS or through the use of cellular location services.” The teachings of Soliman teaches an alternative “available service” for geolocation since in some cases, as taught by Soliman in paragraph 6, GPS while extremely accurate, may be blocked by structures, foliage and other obstacles rendering it inaccurate in some cases for indoor use.
RE claim 2, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 1 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses further comprising: after a predetermined time, repeating making the location information available, over the network, from the transceiver device to the database containing the locations of the incumbent devices; obtaining, from the database, disapproval for the transceiver device to operate in the high power mode, based on the repeated location information and updated locations of the active incumbent devices; and operating the transceiver device in the low power mode, responsive to obtaining the disapproval (Paragraphs 52-54 discloses the AP may send heartbeat messages in order to ensure the exclusion zone data is current and to confirm the device is active. It may also deregister, and therefore may need to register, if moved a threshold distance or in response to other triggering event. As such, it is a disclosure that the AP periodically renews its permission to operate in the high/normal power mode for a given location and if disapproved for any reason, such as the new location being within an exclusion zone or the current location now being within a newly established exclusion zone, it will not operate in the high/normal power mode. Otherwise, it remains operating in the high/normal power mode).
Ansley does not explicitly disclose reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device.
However, Soliman teaches reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device (Paragraph 61 teaches “As user equipment 420 comes within range of the tags 410, 412, 414, and 416, because the tags have been surveyed in and their confidence level is high, the user equipment may update its location.” Paragraph 50 further teaches a reader within the UE having an RF transponder, antenna, memory and a processor. The reader interacts with the tags as they come in proximity with one another.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley with the teachings of Soliman in order to provide for accurate geolocation for devices where GPS is inaccurate or unusable. Ansley explicitly states in paragraph 74 “a device might use an available service to determine its location in lieu of having the ability to determine its location through access to a GPS or through the use of cellular location services.” The teachings of Soliman teaches an alternative “available service” for geolocation since in some cases, as taught by Soliman in paragraph 6, GPS while extremely accurate, may be blocked by structures, foliage and other obstacles rendering it inaccurate in some cases for indoor use.
RE claim 6, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 1 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses further comprising: after a predetermined time, repeating making the location information available, over the network, from the transceiver device to the database; obtaining, from the database, reapproval for the transceiver device to operate in the high power mode, based on the location information and updated locations of the active incumbent devices; and continuing to operate the transceiver device in the high power mode, responsive to obtaining the reapproval (Paragraphs 52-54 discloses the AP may send heartbeat messages in order to ensure the exclusion zone data is current and to confirm the device is active. It may also deregister, and therefore may need to register, if moved a threshold distance or in response to other triggering event. As such, it is a disclosure that the AP periodically renews its permission to operate in the high/normal power mode for a given location and if disapproved for any reason, such as the new location being within an exclusion zone or the current location now being within a newly established exclusion zone, it will not operate in the high/normal power mode. Otherwise, it remains operating in the high/normal power mode).
Ansley does not explicitly disclose reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device.
However, Soliman teaches reading the location information with a reader portion of a front end chip of a transceiver device adjacent the tag device (Paragraph 61 teaches “As user equipment 420 comes within range of the tags 410, 412, 414, and 416, because the tags have been surveyed in and their confidence level is high, the user equipment may update its location.” Paragraph 50 further teaches a reader within the UE having an RF transponder, antenna, memory and a processor. The reader interacts with the tags as they come in proximity with one another.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley with the teachings of Soliman in order to provide for accurate geolocation for devices where GPS is inaccurate or unusable. Ansley explicitly states in paragraph 74 “a device might use an available service to determine its location in lieu of having the ability to determine its location through access to a GPS or through the use of cellular location services.” The teachings of Soliman teaches an alternative “available service” for geolocation since in some cases, as taught by Soliman in paragraph 6, GPS while extremely accurate, may be blocked by structures, foliage and other obstacles rendering it inaccurate in some cases for indoor use.
RE claim 8, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 1 as set forth above. Note that Soliman further teaches wherein reading the location information with the reader portion of the front end chip of the transceiver device adjacent the tag device comprises the reader portion of the front end chip of the transceiver device wirelessly interrogating the tag device via near field communications (Paragraphs 59-60 teaches a geolocation system, in this case utilized by a user equipment, based upon RFID tags spread throughout an office building wherein “location information stored in the tags may include latitude and longitude (lat/long), street address, floor, or room location, or any combination of these”. Paragraph 61 teaches “As user equipment 420 comes within range of the tags 410, 412, 414, and 416, because the tags have been surveyed in and their confidence level is high, the user equipment may update its location.” Paragraph 50 further teaches a reader within the UE having an RF transponder, antenna, memory and a processor. The reader interacts with the tags as they come in proximity with one another.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley with the teachings of Soliman in order to provide for accurate geolocation for devices where GPS is inaccurate or unusable. Ansley explicitly states in paragraph 74 “a device might use an available service to determine its location in lieu of having the ability to determine its location through access to a GPS or through the use of cellular location services.” The teachings of Soliman teaches an alternative “available service” for geolocation since in some cases, as taught by Soliman in paragraph 6, GPS while extremely accurate, may be blocked by structures, foliage and other obstacles rendering it inaccurate in some cases for indoor use.
RE claim 11, Ansley discloses a kit of parts comprising: a transceiver device having a high power mode and a low power mode (Paragraph 69 discloses an adaptive movable access point system that operates in a low power mode and a high/normal power mode), a network interface configured to communicate over a network with a database containing locations of incumbent devices (Paragraphs 69 further discloses “The AP 505 may connect to a mobile application (e.g., application running at the external device 510), and the AP 505 may receive location information (e.g., GPS data/coordinates) from the external device 510. The AP 505 may output an AFC request to an AFC system 515, wherein the AFC request includes the location information. The AP 505 may receive an AFC response from the AFC system 515, wherein the response either approves or denies the AP request to operate within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power. “. At least paragraph 34 further discloses “The AFC system 115 may include a database that contains pre-calculated exclusion zone data for one or more microwave paths. It should be understood that spectrum availability may be calculated upon request. The exclusion zone data may be updated at the database periodically (e.g., hourly, daily, etc.) or in response to an addition or deletion of data associated with a microwave path. Communications between a device and the AFC system 115 may be over wired or wireless links not in the 6 GHz band. The AFC system 115 and its database may be connected to a packet-based wide area network (e.g., wide area network (WAN) 120), including but not limited to the Internet. Each of one or more devices (e.g., AP 105) may register with the database. Initial registration and query may be made outside of the 6 GHz bands. In embodiments, each device (e.g., APs 105) may also register devices that are associated with the device (e.g., STAs (stations) 110, clients, etc.). Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device), an identification of the device type, identifying information (e.g., unique identifiers), and/or other information associated with the device. Based upon the query received from each respective one device, the database may determine a proximity of the respective device to one or more exclusion zones.” Though the term “incumbent” is not use, this is a description of a database of existing devise and their locations, where a new device is authorized to operate in a high/normal power mode based on the devices already in the database which establish exclusion zones for said high/normal power operation due the likelihood of interference.).
Ansley does explicitly disclose a tag device having a memory portion configured to store geographic location information and an adhesive portion configured to be affixed to a fixed surface; and the transceiver device having a front end chip with a reader portion configured to read the location information.
However, Soliman teaches a tag device having a memory portion configured to store geographic location information (Paragraphs 59-60 teaches a geolocation system, in this case utilized by a user equipment, based upon RFID tags spread throughout an office building wherein “location information stored in the tags may include latitude and longitude (lat/long), street address, floor, or room location, or any combination of these”.) and an adhesive portion configured to be affixed to a fixed surface (Paragraph 60 teaches the tags are pre-surveyed and placed in a fixed location); and a front end chip with a reader portion configured to read the location information. (Paragraph 61 teaches “As user equipment 420 comes within range of the tags 410, 412, 414, and 416, because the tags have been surveyed in and their confidence level is high, the user equipment may update its location.” Paragraph 50 further teaches a reader within the UE having an RF transponder, antenna, memory and a processor. The reader interacts with the tags as they come in proximity with one another.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the kit of Ansley with the teachings of Soliman in order to provide for accurate geolocation for devices where GPS is inaccurate or unusable. Ansley explicitly states in paragraph 74 “a device might use an available service to determine its location in lieu of having the ability to determine its location through access to a GPS or through the use of cellular location services.” The teachings of Soliman teaches an alternative “available service” for geolocation since in some cases, as taught by Soliman in paragraph 6, GPS while extremely accurate, may be blocked by structures, foliage and other obstacles rendering it inaccurate in some cases for indoor use.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Gong et al. (CN 213903776, Gong hereafter, citing the attached machine generated English translation).
RE claim 3, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 2 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Soliman does not explicitly disclose designating the stored geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device as read only.
However, Gong teaches designating the stored geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device as read only (Paragraph 24 teaches RFID tags storing location data within read-only memory).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman with the teachings of Gong in order prevent RFID tag data tampering.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Demule et al. (WO 2022/269155, Demule hereafter, citing the attached machine generated English translation).
RE claim 4, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 3 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Soliman does not explicitly disclose wherein storing the geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device comprises storing by a technician using a mobile device with a technician application.
However, Demule teaches wherein storing the geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device comprises storing by a technician using a mobile device with a technician application (As set forth above, Ansley already discloses the location information stored in a tag is “pre-surveyed”. Demule provides a teaching that an installer/technician can write information to NFC/RFID tags using a software application on their mobile terminal. See paragraph 23 of the WIPO publication, corresponding to sections under the bolded “[0030]” of the machine translation document which teaches “The installation technician 5 can then bring the mobile terminal 4 close to the NFC tag of the hose clamp 2 to record any information entered in step 120 in the NFC tag 3, via the NFC read /write means of the mobile terminal 4 (view (c) and step 130 of figure 2)”.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman with the teachings of Demule since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Maman et al. (US 2018/0061277, Maman hereafter).
RE claim 5, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 3 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Soliman does not explicitly disclose wherein storing the geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device comprises storing by a customer using a customer device with a customer application.
However, Maman teaches wherein storing the geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device comprises storing by a customer using a customer device with a customer application (As set forth above, Ansley already discloses the location information stored in a tag is “pre-surveyed”. Maman provides a teaching that a customer can write information to NFC/RFID tags using a software application on their mobile terminal. Paragraph 67 teaches “According to embodiments where the tag 100 is an NFC tag, a customer may change the communication information stored in the tag 100 with an NFC writing application that is available for download, for example READ, NFC TOOLS, and the like.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman with the teachings of Maman since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Roisen et al. (US 2016/0379179, Roisen hereafter) and further in view of Kiukkonen et al. (US 2014/0068719, Kiukkonen hereafter).
RE claim 7, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 1 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses wherein, in the step of storing the geographic location information in the memory portion of the tag device, the geographic location information comprises longitude information and latitude information (Paragraph 10).
Ansley in view of Soliman does not explicitly disclose the geographic location information comprises elevation information, and a router identification.
However, Roisen teaches the geographic location information comprises elevation information (Paragraph 3, an asset tracking NFC tag stores barometric elevation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman with the teachings of Roisen since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Roisen does not explicitly disclose the geographic location information comprises a router identification.
However, Kiukkonen teaches the geographic location information comprises a router identification (Paragraph 290 teaches a guest wireless device B can read an NFC tag having a field “providing the MAC address of the access point”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Roisen with the teachings of Kiukkonen since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Soliman, in view of Demule and further in view of Maman.
RE claim 9, Ansley in view of Soliman discloses the method of claim 1 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Soliman does not explicitly disclose advising at least one of a technician or a consumer using at least one of a web site, a mobile device with a technician application; or a customer device with a customer application.
However, Demule teaches a mobile device with a technician application (As set forth above, Ansley already discloses the location information stored in a tag is “pre-surveyed”. Demule provides a teaching that an installer/technician can write information to NFC/RFID tags using a software application on their mobile terminal. See paragraph 23 of the WIPO publication, corresponding to sections under the bolded “[0030]” of the machine translation document which teaches “The installation technician 5 can then bring the mobile terminal 4 close to the NFC tag of the hose clamp 2 to record any information entered in step 120 in the NFC tag 3, via the NFC read /write means of the mobile terminal 4 (view (c) and step 130 of figure 2)”.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman with the teachings of Demule since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Demule does not explicitly disclose advising at least one of a technician or a consumer using at least one of a web site or
However, Maman teaches a customer device with a customer application (As set forth above, Ansley already discloses the location information stored in a tag is “pre-surveyed”. Maman provides a teaching that a customer can write information to NFC/RFID tags using a software application on their mobile terminal. Paragraph 67 teaches “According to embodiments where the tag 100 is an NFC tag, a customer may change the communication information stored in the tag 100 with an NFC writing application that is available for download, for example READ, NFC TOOLS, and the like.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Soliman and further in view of Demule with the teachings of Maman since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claims 12, 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Ashcraft et al. (US 6,470,268, Ashcraft hereafter).
RE claims 12 and 21, Ansley discloses a method and system comprising: a memory; and at least one processor, coupled to the memory, and operative to: retrieve a service address from a database of an internet service provider; associate a transceiver device with a geographic location (Paragraph 44 “In embodiments, the AFC system 115 may utilize location information from multiple sources to verify or otherwise improve the level of confidence in a determined location of a device (e.g., AP 105). For example, the AFC system 115 may correlate location information of a device with GPS data with a physical address associated with a customer (e.g., an address recovered from billing data or subscriber information held at a subscriber information server 125 such as a service provider server or other server storing subscriber or account information.), the transceiver device being configurable to operate in a standard power mode and a low power mode having a lower power than the standard power mode(Paragraph 69 discloses an adaptive movable access point system that operates in a low power mode and a high/normal power mode); make the geographic location available, over a network, to a database containing locations of active incumbent devices; obtain, from the database, approval for the transceiver device to operate in the standard power mode, based on the geographic location and the locations of the active incumbent devices (Paragraph 69 further discloses “The AP 505 may connect to a mobile application (e.g., application running at the external device 510), and the AP 505 may receive location information (e.g., GPS data/coordinates) from the external device 510. The AP 505 may output an AFC request to an AFC system 515, wherein the AFC request includes the location information. The AP 505 may receive an AFC response from the AFC system 515, wherein the response either approves or denies the AP request to operate within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power. “. At least paragraph 34 further discloses “The AFC system 115 may include a database that contains pre-calculated exclusion zone data for one or more microwave paths. It should be understood that spectrum availability may be calculated upon request. The exclusion zone data may be updated at the database periodically (e.g., hourly, daily, etc.) or in response to an addition or deletion of data associated with a microwave path. Communications between a device and the AFC system 115 may be over wired or wireless links not in the 6 GHz band. The AFC system 115 and its database may be connected to a packet-based wide area network (e.g., wide area network (WAN) 120), including but not limited to the Internet. Each of one or more devices (e.g., AP 105) may register with the database. Initial registration and query may be made outside of the 6 GHz bands. In embodiments, each device (e.g., APs 105) may also register devices that are associated with the device (e.g., STAs (stations) 110, clients, etc.). Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device), an identification of the device type, identifying information (e.g., unique identifiers), and/or other information associated with the device. Based upon the query received from each respective one device, the database may determine a proximity of the respective device to one or more exclusion zones.” Though the term “incumbent” is not use, this is a description of a database of existing devise and their locations, where a new device is authorized to operate in a high/normal power mode based on the devices already in the database which establish exclusion zones for said high/normal power operation due the likelihood of interference.); and cause operation of the transceiver device in the standard power mode, responsive to obtaining the approval (Paragraph 69 further discloses “If the AFC response approves the AP's use of the 6 GHz band, the AP 505 may switch to operating within the 6 GHz band at high/normal power levels (e.g., 1 W).”).
Ansley does not explicitly disclose obtaining the corresponding geographic location from a geographic information system server based on the service address.
However, Ashcraft teaches obtaining the corresponding geographic location from a geographic information system server based on the service address (Column 3, lines 50-61 teaches a Geographic Information System which references and converts a physical address to geographic coordinates in addition to other location or descriptive information).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method and system of Ansley with the teachings of Ashcraft since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
RE claim 18, Ansley in view of Ashcraft discloses the method of claim 12 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses wherein associating the transceiver device with the geographic location includes checking the transceiver device with a corresponding node (Paragraphs 35-39, AP may determine location vis its internal GPS, via a detached GPS receiver, via cellular triangulation or an alternative satellite based service such as Galileo).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view of Nagaraju et al. (US 2023/0300884, Nagaraju hereafter).
RE claim 13, Ansley in view of Ashcraft discloses the method of claim 12 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further teaches where the geographic location data includes latitude and longitude (Paragraph 10).
Ansley in view of Ashcraft does not explicitly disclose making altitude-related data from the transceiver device available, over the network, to the database containing locations of active incumbent devices, wherein the approval for the transceiver device to operate in the standard power mode is further based on the altitude-related data.
However, Nagaraju teaches making altitude-related data from the transceiver device available, over the network, to the database containing locations of active incumbent devices, wherein the approval for the transceiver device to operate in the standard power mode is further based on the altitude-related data (Paragraphs 31 and 58, “the access point 50 requests that the AFC Service 61 provide at least one available communication channel for use by the access point 50 at its present location. The computation engine 63 of the AFC Service interrogates the central database 65 to identify existing location and altitude information of any licensed user at the location of the access point 50.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Ashcraft with the teachings of Nagaraju since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
RE claim 14, Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view of Nagaraju discloses the method of claim 13 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view of Nagaraju discloses the claimed invention except for repeating, for a plurality of additional transceiver devices configurable to operate in the standard power mode and the low power mode, the retrieving of the service address, obtaining of the corresponding geographic location, associating each transceiver device of the plurality of additional transceiver devices with a corresponding geographic location, making the corresponding geographic location and corresponding altitude-related data available, obtaining approval for each transceiver device of the plurality of additional transceiver devices to operate in the standard power mode, and the operating of each transceiver device of the plurality of additional transceiver devices in the standard power mode, responsive to obtaining the approvals.
However, as set forth in the already cited disclosures of at least Ansley and Nagaraju, the AFC system is designed to operate to receive multiple device registrations and use those registered devices to determine permission for a given AP to operate in a high/normal power mode. As such, it would be a mere matter of design choice to follow the implication that this operation would be repeated with multiple devices/APs as they are deployed.
Furthermore, it as been held to duplicate prior art parts for multiple effect does not make the claimed invention patentable over that prior art (Saint Regis Paper Company v. Bemis Company Incorporated, 193 USPQ 8).
It would be therefore obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to merely repeat the method of Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view of Nagaraju unchanged for each of multiple devices.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Ashcraft, in view of Nagaraju and further in view of Caplan et al. (WO 2007/124504 A2, Caplan hereafter).
RE claim 15, Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view Nagaraju discloses the method of claim 14 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Ashcraft does not explicitly disclose aggregating the geographic location and the altitude-related data at a domain proxy server of the internet service provider, wherein the geographic location and the altitude-related data are made available to the database from the domain proxy server.
However, Caplan teaches aggregating the geographic location and the altitude-related data at a domain proxy server of the internet service provider, wherein the geographic location and the altitude-related data are made available to the database from the domain proxy server (Paragraph 17 teaches” A proxy server may store and make available to the system information regarding one or more remote units. Such information may include, for example, a remote unit's identification, type, location, and availability. The system may use such information for, among other things, determining which remote units will receive data requests. In one embodiment, proxy servers also may store and make available to the system sense-on-demand data and/or metadata uploaded from remote units on a periodic basis. In such case, the query engine will transmit data requests first to proxy servers associated with relevant remote units, which will provide data responses to the extent they possess adequate information. If the proxy servers lack sufficient information to provide data responses, they will transmit the data requests to their associated remote units.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view Nagaraju with the teachings of Caplan in order to reduce network traffic, load and/or latency associated with queries and responses between network devices.
RE claim 16, Ansley in view of Ashcraft, in view of Nagaraju and further in view of Caplan discloses the method of claim 15 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses repeating the step of making the geographic location available after a predetermined time period, and, responsive to the repeated step, obtaining, from the database, updated approval for the transceiver device to continue to operate in the standard power mode, based on the geographic location and updated locations of the incumbent devices; and continuing to operate the transceiver device in the standard power mode, responsive to obtaining the approval (Paragraphs 52-54 discloses the AP may send heartbeat messages in order to ensure the exclusion zone data is current and to confirm the device is active. It may also deregister, and therefore may need to register, if moved a threshold distance or in response to other triggering event. As such, it is a disclosure that the AP periodically renews its permission to operate in the high/normal power mode for a given location and if disapproved for any reason, such as the new location being within an exclusion zone or the current location now being within a newly established exclusion zone, it will not operate in the high/normal power mode. Otherwise, it remains operating in the high/normal power mode).
RE claim 17, Ansley in view of Ashcraft, in view of Nagaraju and further in view of Caplan discloses the method of claim 15 as set forth above. Note that Ansley further discloses repeating the step of making the geographic location available after a predetermined time period, and, responsive to the repeated step, obtaining, from the database, denial for the transceiver device to continue to operate in the standard power mode, based on the geographic location and updated locations of the incumbent devices; and operating the transceiver device in the low power mode, responsive to obtaining the denial (Paragraphs 52-54 discloses the AP may send heartbeat messages in order to ensure the exclusion zone data is current and to confirm the device is active. It may also deregister, and therefore may need to register, if moved a threshold distance or in response to other triggering event. As such, it is a disclosure that the AP periodically renews its permission to operate in the high/normal power mode for a given location and if disapproved for any reason, such as the new location being within an exclusion zone or the current location now being within a newly established exclusion zone, it will not operate in the high/normal power mode. Otherwise, it remains operating in the high/normal power mode).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ansley in view of Ashcraft and further in view of Siomina).
RE claim 20, Ansley in view of Ashcraft discloses the method of claim 12 as set forth above. Ansley in view of Ashcraft does not explicitly disclose wherein making the geographic location available includes specifying at least one of an ellipse, a linear polygon, and a radial polygon.
However, Siomina teaches wherein making the geographic location available includes specifying at least one of an ellipse, a linear polygon, and a radial polygon (Paragraph 323, a positioning flow carrying out a positioning method generates location information of a terminal. The terminal reports this information which includes “"loc_un" is the location uncertainty, which may be associated with an arbitrary shape e.g. circle/ellipse/polygon etc”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Ansley in view of Ashcraft with the teachings of Siomina in order to provide for a measure of location uncertainty to allow for a determination of position accuracy of a mobile device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but may be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
RE claim 10, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest responsive to failure of the attempting to repeat the reading of the location information with the reader portion of the front end chip of the transceiver device, operating the transceiver device in the low power mode.
The closest prior art to this limitation may be found in the Non-Patent Literature filed alongside the Information Disclosure Statement filed December 26, 2025 for the instant application titled “FCC FACT SHEET Unlicensed Use of the 6 GHz Band Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking”, item 22 of the IDS under Non-Patent Literature.
On page 19, items 46 and 47 are directed to the requirement by the FCC for a device to periodically verify frequency and power mode availability with the AFC system once per day. A device that fails to do so is required to cease operation. The exception to this is if the AFC system itself becomes temporality unavailable. In that case, the device may continue to use its allocation until 11:59pm the following day. This fails to explicitly disclose, teach or suggest the claimed failure scenario. This reference at best supports a device ceasing operation or maintaining its current allocation, which may include remaining at a previously permitted high/normal power, when it fails to contact the AFC system.
RE claim 19, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest wherein associating the transceiver device with the geographic location includes: identifying a first group of service locations from the internet service provider database that fall within building outlines from the geographic information system; and discarding a second group of service locations from the internet service provider database that fall outside of building outlines from the geographic information system; wherein the transceiver device is associated with the first group of service locations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James P Duffy whose telephone number is (571)270-7516. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/James P Duffy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461