Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention in the reply filed on October 15, 2025 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, the “or” language, the condition would also not occur and the step or function claimed would never be realized, hence the claim does not require to perform the step or function. See Ex parte Katz, 2011 WL 514314, at 4-5 (BPAI Jan. 27, 2011, 2011 WL 1211248 at 2 (BPAI Mar. 25, 2011); see also In re Johnston, 435 f.3d 1381, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2006)( "optional elements do not narrow the claim because they can always be omitted”). “Or” conditions are not limitations against which prior art must be found. Under the broadest scenario, the steps or functions dependent on the “or” condition would not be invoked, and such, the Examiner is not required to find these limitations in the prior art in order to render the claim anticipated. In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 f.3d 1359, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
Specification
The use of the term ZIGBEE, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NG Radio Access Network (NG-RAN); Stage 2 functional specification of User Equipment (UE) positioning in NG-RAN (Release 15), 3GPP TS 38.305 V15.8.0(2021-03).3GPP 2021-03-29.
3rd Generation Partnership Project discloses a method of measurement reporting for determination of a position of a UE (user equipment), the method comprising measuring, at the UE, a plurality of PRS resources (positioning reference signal resources) (fig 8.2.3.3.1-1, pages 46-47, chapter 8.2.3.3.1 and transmitting, from the UE to a network entity, a PRS measurement report including one or more first measurements of one or more first PRS resources of the plurality of PRS resources and including an indication of one or more second PRS resources of the plurality of PRS resources corresponding to one or more second measurements made by the UE and omitted from the PRS measurement report (chapters 8.2.1, 8.2.3.3.1 to 8.2.3.3.2, pages 46-47.
The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 9, 10, 13, 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NG Radio Access Network (NG-RAN); Stage 2 functional specification of User Equipment (UE) positioning in NG-RAN (Release 15), 3GPP TS 38.305 V15.8.0(2021-03).3GPP 2021-03-29 in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0067990 (Opshaug, et al).
Regarding claims 1, 10, 13, by 3rd Generation Partnership Project discloses all subject matter, note the above paragraph which states determination of a position of a UE (user equipment), the method comprising measuring, at the UE, a plurality of PRS resources (positioning reference signal resources) (fig 8.2.3.3.1-1, pages 46-47, chapter 8.2.3.3.1 and transmitting, from the UE to a network entity, a PRS measurement report including one or more first measurements of one or more first PRS resources of the plurality of PRS resources and including an indication of one or more second PRS resources of the plurality of PRS resources corresponding to one or more second measurements made by the UE and omitted from the PRS measurement report (chapters 8.2.1, 8.2.3.3.1 to 8.2.3.3.2, pages 46-47), except for a transceiver, a memory, and a processor, communicatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory, the means, and non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium comprising processor-readable instructions. Opshaug, et al teaches the use of a transceiver, a memory, and a processor, communicatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory, the means, and non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium comprising processor-readable instructions in an user equipment for the purpose of supporting location of a user equipment (UE) performed by the UE, may include determining to use a measurement gap for intra-frequency positioning measurements outside a bandwidth part of the UE, note figure 3, #354a-r, 382, 380, claim 36. Hence, it 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 to incorporate the use of a transceiver, a memory, and a processor, communicatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory, the means, and non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium comprising processor-readable instructions in an user equipment for the purpose of supporting location of a user equipment (UE) performed by the UE, may include determining to use a measurement gap for intra-frequency positioning measurements outside a bandwidth part of the UE in the user equipment of 3rd Generation Partnership Project in order to have a second PRS resources comprises a PRS resource identity for each of the one or more second PRS resources.
Regarding claim 9, this is the inherent means plus function of the apparatus claim and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Regarding claims 2, 6, 10, and 14, note ¶3, 49, 72, 101, etc. in Opshaug, et al shows the indication of the one or more second PRS resources comprises a PRS resource identity for each of the one or more second PRS resources.
The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 16, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NG Radio Access Network (NG-RAN); Stage 2 functional specification of User Equipment (UE) positioning in NG-RAN (Release 15), 3GPP TS 38.305 V15.8.0(2021-03).3GPP 2021-03-29 in view of WO 2020/064698.
3rd Generation Partnership Project discloses all subject matter, note the above paragraphs, except for the PRS measurement report includes a further indication corresponding to at least one of the one or more first measurements and indicating whether at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from full processing of a respective one of the one or more first PRS resources or partial processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources (claims 3, 7, 11, 15) and the indication indicates whether the at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from partial time processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or partial frequency processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or a combination thereof (claims 4, 8, 12, 16). WO 2020/064698 teaches the use of the PRS measurement report includes a further indication corresponding to at least one of the one or more first measurements and indicating whether at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from full processing of a respective one of the one or more first PRS resources or partial processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources and the indication indicates whether the at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from partial time processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or partial frequency processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or a combination thereof for the purpose of operational tasks to be performed in slots that are partially overlapped by measurement gaps in a wireless communication system, note pages 15-21. Hence, it 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 to incorporate the use of the PRS measurement report includes a further indication corresponding to at least one of the one or more first measurements and indicating whether at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from full processing of a respective one of the one or more first PRS resources or partial processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources and the indication indicates whether the at least one of the one or more first measurements resulted from partial time processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or partial frequency processing of the respective one of the one or more first PRS resources, or a combination thereof for the purpose of operational tasks to be performed in slots that are partially overlapped by measurement gaps in a wireless communication system, as taught by WO 2020/064698, in 3rd Generation Partnership Project, in order to perform scheduled communications operations for a serving cell comprises determining a communication slot that is partially overlapped by a measurement gap, the communication slot being associated with a serving cell of the wireless device.
The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Conclusion
If applicants wish to request for an interview, an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form (PTOL-413A) should be submitted to the examiner prior to the interview in order to permit the examiner to prepare in advance for the interview and to focus on the issues to be discussed. This form should identify the participants of the interview, the proposed date of the interview, whether the interview will be personal, telephonic, or video conference, and should include a brief description of the issues to be discussed. A copy of the completed "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form should be attached to the Interview Summary form, PTOL-413 at the completion of the interview and a copy should be given to applicant or applicant's representative.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM D CUMMING whose telephone number is (571)272-7861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 noon to 6pm.
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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
WILLIAM D. CUMMING
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2645
/WILLIAM D CUMMING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645