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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because in the specification, the phrase “a computer storage medium” is mentioned broadly (open-ended) as different types of “memory” and “storage technologies”. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), “a computer storage medium” covers forms of transitory propagating signals per se, and therefore would not be patent-eligible.
It is suggested that the recitation “A computer storage medium” in claim 9 should be changed to --A non-transitory computer readable storage medium--.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6-9, 11, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Weisbrod (US 2022/0182830).
As to claim 1, Weisbrod discloses a method performed by a radio node 110 (see at least figure 1D) for determining the presence of a repeater 106 repeating a signal related to positioning (see paragraph [0054] which discloses “Additionally, or alternatively, to determining the location as a location within the threshold distance of the first location, the communication monitoring system 110 may determine the location associated with the wireless communication repeater 106 based on a ratio of the signal strength and the timing advance distance (e.g., identified in the information regarding the wireless communication)”) or synchronization in a wireless communications network 100, the method comprising: obtaining a respective first characteristic for one or more received signals, which first characteristic is any one or more out of: an autocorrelation of a received signal; and a value representative of a radio channel related to a received signal (see paragraph [0044] which discloses “For example, the communication monitoring system 110 may determine the expected parameter (e.g., the expected signal strength, the expected timing advance, the ratio of the expected signal strength and the expected timing advance, among other examples) for the first location based on receiving the wireless communications information”); and determining the presence of the repeater by detecting an anomaly based on the respective first characteristic (see paragraph [0047] which discloses “For example, the communication monitoring system 110 may detect that the wireless communication repeater 106 is relaying the wireless communication of the UE 102 when the signal strength difference does not satisfy the signal strength difference threshold, when the timing advance difference does not satisfy the timing advance difference threshold, when the ratio difference does not satisfy the ratio difference threshold, among other examples”; see also paragraph [0019] which discloses “As described in more detail below, the communication monitoring system 110 may use the information identifying expected signal strengths associated with a location and/or the information identifying expected timing advances associated with the location to detect the presence of an unauthorized wireless communication repeater in the wireless network”).
As to claim 6, Weisbrod discloses that obtaining the respective first characteristic of the one or more received signals comprises any one out of: calculating the respective autocorrelation of the one or more received signals; and estimating, based on the one or more received signals, a respective value representative of a radio channel related to the one or more received signals (see paragraph [0044] which discloses “For example, the communication monitoring system 110 may determine the expected parameter (e.g., the expected signal strength, the expected timing advance, the ratio of the expected signal strength and the expected timing advance, among other examples) for the first location based on receiving the wireless communications information”).
As to claims 7, 17, Weisbrod discloses receiving a signal related to positioning. See paragraph [0054] which discloses “Additionally, or alternatively, to determining the location as a location within the threshold distance of the first location, the communication monitoring system 110 may determine the location associated with the wireless communication repeater 106 based on a ratio of the signal strength and the timing advance distance (e.g., identified in the information regarding the wireless communication)”.
As to claims 8, 18, Weisbrod discloses that the radio node is represented by any one out of: a wireless device; and a network node 110 (see at least figure 1D).
As to claim 9, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above. Weisbrod further discloses a computer storage medium storing a computer program comprising instructions. See paragraph [0078] which discloses “Device 300 may perform one or more processes described herein. For example, a non-transitory computer-readable medium (e.g., memory 330 and/or storage component 340) may store a set of instructions (e.g., one or more instructions, code, software code, and/or program code) for execution by processor 320”.
As to claim 11, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 12-16, 19-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claims 2-3, 19-21, 12-13, the prior art of record fail to disclose determining the presence of the repeater further comprises comparing the first characteristic of at least two of the one or more received signals, which at least two received signals are received at different times, and wherein the anomaly is represented by a second characteristic appearing with the same delay in the respective first characteristic of the at least two received signals.
As to claims 4-5, 14-16, the prior art of record fail to disclose receiving from another radio node, a signal indicating a third characteristic, which third characteristic is related to a radio channel; and wherein determining the presence of the repeater further comprises comparing the respective first characteristic with the third characteristic, and wherein the anomaly is represented by the first characteristic being different from the third characteristic.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McDowell (US 7,250,903 B1); and Koji (JP2009194566 A) disclose detecting presence of a repeater.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN THANH VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7901. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Jeanette J Parker can be reached at (571) 270-3647. 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.
/NGUYEN T VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights