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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21 lines 16-17 and corresponding portions of claim 31, the scope of “measurement information” and “positioning uncertainty information” cannot be clearly determined. It is unclear if the “measurement information” refers to the previously recited “first set of measurements” (lines 8-10) or to some other measurements. It is unclear if the “positioning uncertainty information” refers to the previously recited “positioning uncertainty threshold” (line 7) or “first positioning uncertainty” (line 11) or to some other positioning uncertainty information.
Regarding claim 24 line 1 and corresponding portions of claim 34, “the configuration information” lacks clear antecedent basis in the claim. The claims previously refers to first, second, and third subsets of configuration information – see claims 21-22 and 31-32. It is unclear if “the configuration information” refers to one or more of the subsets, or to different configuration information.
The remaining claims are dependent.
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, 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 21, 27, 29, 31, 37, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao (US 20220069962 A1) in view of Marshall (US 20140221005 A1, cited on IDS) and further in view of Stilp (US 20020080069 A1).
.
Regarding claims 21 and 31, Bao teaches [NOTE: limitations not taught by Bao are lined through] a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (UE 104, Fig. 1) comprising:
a processor (para. [0008] “a user equipment (UE) includes ... at least one processor”) configured to:
receive a first subset of positioning reference signal (PRS) configuration information, a second subset of PRS configuration information, and a third subset of PRS configuration information (para. [0153] “a PRS configuration may specify two or more PRS bandwidths” and “The PRS configuration... may be signaled (preconfigured) to the UE”, where each bandwidth comprises a subset of PRS configuration information as claimed, and “two or more PRS bandwidths” includes within its scope three bandwidths);
receive configuration information indicating (para. [0153] “a switching pattern can be added to the PRS configuration” and “the switching pattern, may be signaled (preconfigured) to the UE”),
perform a first set of measurements using the first switching pattern, the first subset of PRS configuration information, and the second subset of PRS configuration information (para. [0154] “the larger bandwidth ... for time-and-angle-based measurements and the smaller bandwidth ... for angle-only measurements”, where the bandwidths alternate according to the switching pattern as per para. [0153] “a switching pattern indicating which bandwidth is configured for which occasion, slot, frame, etc.”);
determine a first positioning uncertainty based on the first set of measurements (para. [0130] “A location estimate may include an expected error or uncertainty” in view of para. [0123] “the positioning entity (e.g., the UE for UE-based positioning ... can estimate the UE' s location”) and
As indicated by the lined through language, Bao does not teach the WTRU:
receiving configuration information indicating error source information;
receiving configuration information indicating a positioning uncertainty threshold;
determining the first positioning uncertainty based on the error source information;
determine that the first positioning uncertainty is greater than the positioning uncertainty threshold; and
send, based on the determination that the first positioning uncertainty is greater than the positioning uncertainty threshold, an indication indicating measurement information and positioning uncertainty information.
Regarding (1), Marshall, in analogous art, teaches a WTRU receiving configuration information indicating error source information (para. [0012] “a Mobile Station (MS) may ... obtain location assistance data comprising a map with a plurality of map layers, wherein each map layer associates locations in a Base Station Almanac (BSA) with spatially variable Forward Link Calibration (FLC) values for an antenna”; para. [0055] “uncertainty in the base station antenna position, uncertainty in the forward-link delay calibration, and uncertainty in the round-trip delay calibration”).
Marshall further teaches (3) determining a first positioning uncertainty based on the error source information (para. [0062] “MS 120 may use information in one or more map layers to estimate a location and location uncertainty”).
It would have been obvious to modify Bao in view of Marshall by receiving error source information and determining a positioning uncertainty based thereon in order to evaluate the quality of the position determined by Bao in paras. [0123] and [0130]. This is a matter of using of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way, an exemplary rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness, see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
Regarding (2), (4), and (5), it is known to determine that a positioning uncertainty is greater than a threshold and send an indication based on the determination. For example, see Stilp para. [0166] “the diagnostic port can determine the error in the location estimate in real time and then write the above described information only for those location estimates whose error exceeds a predetermined threshold”, where the “above described information” that is written comprises “all of the demodulation and RF data received from the SCS's 10, as well as the intermediate and final results of all location processing” and meets the “indication” that is “sent”. Stilp teaches that this is “is highly useful in the operation and diagnosis of problems within the Wireless Location System” (para. [0166]).
It would have been obvious to further modify Bao in view of Stilp in order to support the operation and diagnosis of problems at the WTRU. This is a matter of using of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way, an exemplary rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness, see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
Regarding claims 27 and 37, it would have been obvious to implement the measurement information as Bao’s first set of measurements and the positioning uncertainty information as Bao’s first positioning uncertainty, as this information would fall within the scope of “all of the demodulation and RF data received from the SCS's 10, as well as the intermediate and final results of all location processing” that is “sent” in order to provide for “operation and diagnosis of problems within the Wireless Location System” as taught by Stilp in para. [0166].
Regarding claims 29 and 39, performing a second set of measurements using the third subset of PRS configuration information and determining a second positioning uncertainty amounts to a mere duplication of the performing and determining recited in claim 21 lines 8-12 for the first set of measurements with the predictable result of an additional positioning uncertainty result that could be used to confirm the first positioning uncertainty result. A duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. B. This is therefore considered an obvious modification of Bao.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-26, 28, 30, 32-36, 38, and 40 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSI J GALT whose telephone number is (571)270-1469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM - 5PM 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, WILLIAM KELLEHER can be reached at (571)272-7753. 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.
/CASSI J GALT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648