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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection because of newly added limitations into currently amended claims. Response to the amendment is as below.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7-13, 15, 18-19, 21-23 and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2021/0274459) (hereafter Wang) in view of Lee et al. (US2024/0224219)(hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a method of location verification performed by a radio access network (RAN) node (see, Fig. 13, 100, RAN), comprising:
receiving a request from a core network node (see, Fig. 9, LMC/AMF is core network) to verify a location of a user equipment (UE) (see, Fig. 13, step 3, LMF/AMF sends location request forward to RAN ) reported by the UE;
performing a RAN-based positioning procedure with the UE to determine a verified location of the UE (see, Fig. 13, the see, steps 4, 5 and 6 describes location measurement configuration, 801 from RAN to the UE and obtain measurement between UE and RAN, 100 and location measurement report, send from UE to RAN, 100); and
transmitting a response to the core network node, the response including: measurements obtained by the UE during the RAN-based positioning procedure, measurements obtained by the RAN node during the RAN-based positioning procedure, the verified location of the UE, an indication that the location of the UB is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 13, step 7, the position calculation,104 in RAN and send location report, from RAN to the UE in step 8a).
Wang does not explicitly disclose verify the location of UE to be reported by the UE as underlined above.
However, in same field of endeavor, Lee teaches in Fig. 7, the target device, (UE/SET) reporting the location of the UE to the location server (LMF). Para [0154], A Location Server may also compute or verify the final location estimate. para [0206] Referring to FIG. 7, LPP may be used as a point-to-point between a location server (E-SMLC and/or SLP and/or LMF) and a target device to position the target device (UE and/or SET) based on position-related measurements obtained from one or more reference sources. The target device and the location server may exchange measurement and/or location information based on signal A and/or signal B through the LPP. [0236] For example, the target device and the location server may exchange capability information, assistance data for positioning, and/or location information with each other through the LPP protocol.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee with the Wang, as a whole, so as to configure location Server to compute or verify the location estimate of the terminal, the motivation is to improve the positioning of the terminal.
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the response further includes a type of the RAN-based positioning procedure (see, Fig. 13, the RAN describes 104, positioning measurement in step 7).
Regarding claim 7, Wang further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the core network node is: an access and mobility management function (AMF), or a location management function (LMF) (see, Fig. 13, LMF/AMF).
Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses a method of location verification performed by a core network node, comprising: transmitting a request to a radio access network (RAN) node to verify a location of a user equipment (UE) (see, Fig. 13, step 3, location request forward from AMF to LMF, and see, Fig. 13, AMF/LMF sends the location request to RAN) reported by the UE; and receiving a response from the RAN node (see, Fig. 13, 8a, location report), the response from the RAN node including measurements obtained by the UE during a RAN-based positioning procedure performed by the RAN node and the UE (see, Fig. 13, step 7, location measurement report, in step 6 , 802), measurements obtained by the RAN node during the RAN-based positioning procedure (see, Fig. 13, the RAN performs, location measurement configuration, 801 and sends the location measurement report to RAN, in 802), a RAN node-verified location of the UE, an indication that the location of the UE is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 13, 8a, location report). Wang does not disclose verify location reported by the UE as underlined above, However, in same field of endeavor, Lee teaches in Fig. 7, the target device, (UE/SET) reporting the location of the UE to the location server (LMF). Para [0154], A Location Server may also compute or verify the final location estimate. para [0206] Referring to FIG. 7, LPP may be used as a point-to-point between a location server (E-SMLC and/or SLP and/or LMF) and a target device to position the target device (UE and/or SET) based on position-related measurements obtained from one or more reference sources. The target device and the location server may exchange measurement and/or location information based on signal A and/or signal B through the LPP. [0236] For example, the target device and the location server may exchange capability information, assistance data for positioning, and/or location information with each other through the LPP protocol.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee with the Wang, as a whole, so as to configure location Server to compute or verify the location estimate of the terminal, the motivation is to improve the positioning of the terminal.
Regarding claim 9, Wang further discloses the method, further comprising: receiving a request from a second core network node to verify the location of the UE (see, Fig. 20, LMF/AMF sends the location request forward in step 3); and transmitting a response to the second core network node, the response to the second core network node including the measurements obtained by the UE during the RAN-based positioning procedure, the measurements obtained by the RAN node during the RAN-based positioning procedure, the RAN node-verified location of the UE, the indication that the location of the UE is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 10, Wang further discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the second core network node is a location management function (LMF) (see, Fig. 8, LMF, 270).
Regarding clam 11, Wang further discloses the method, further comprising: transmitting a request to a location server to verify the location of the UE (see, Fig. 16, the LMF note that the LMF can be interpreted as core network and location server as LMF can be part of the core network); and receiving a response from the location server, the response from the location server including a location server-verified location of the UE, an indication that the location of the UE is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 16, the location , report, 10 and location response, 105 provide to the LMF/AMF as location server is part of core network).
Regarding claim 12, Wang further discloses the method, further comprising: determining whether the location of the UE is verified based on the response from the RAN node, the response from the location server, or both (see, Fig. 13, RAN perform location measurement configuration, 801, obtain measurement, in step 5 and location measurement report , step 6 to the RAN and perform location response from RAN to the LMF/AMF).
Regarding claim 13, Wang further discloses the method, wherein:
the response from the location server includes the location server-verified location of the UE (see, Fig. 13, see, steps 4, 5 and 6, position calculation, 1043 and location response, in step 8), the response from the location server further includes a type of a location server- based positioning procedure performed between the location server and the UE to determine the location server-verified location of the UE (see, Fig. 20, steps 5b and 5c, procedures for DL positioning and procedures for UL positioning and MO-LR response in step 6 between the LMF/AMF and UE), and the location server-verified location of the UE is determined to be verified based on the type of the location server-based positioning procedure (see, para [0018], [0030], a location measurement type, [0037], [0085]).
Regarding claim 15, Wang further discloses the method, wherein the response from the RAN node further includes a type of the RAN-based positioning procedure (see, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 18, Wang further discloses the method, further comprising: triggering a validity timer for the RAN node-verified location of the UE; and triggering a subsequent UE location verification procedure based on one or more triggering events (see, para [0121], timer expiry (periodic LR, 103)).
Regarding claim 19, Wang further discloses the method, wherein the one or more triggering events comprise: expiration of the validity timer, a UE tracking area update, a UE registration area update, a change in UE location above a threshold, a change in country of UE's location, or any combination thereof (see, para [0121], timer expiry (periodic LR,103)).
Regarding claim 21, Wang further discloses the method, wherein the core network node is an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see, Fig. 20, AMF).
Regarding claim 22, Wang discloses a method of location verification performed by a location server (see, Fig. 20, LMF and core network, AMF), comprising: receiving a request from a core network node to verify a location of a user equipment (UE) reported by the UE (see, Fig. 20, AMF sending request to the LMF in step 3 ); performing a location server-based positioning procedure with the UE to determine a verified location of the UE (Fig. 20, 5a, procedures for DL positioning with UE in step 5b); and transmitting a response to the core network node, the response including a verified location of the UE, an indication that the location of the UE is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 20, MO-LR response is sent to the AMF from LMF). Wang does not disclose verify location reported by the UE as underlined above, However, in same field of endeavor, Lee teaches in Fig. 7, the target device, (UE/SET) reporting the location of the UE to the location server (LMF). Para [0154], A Location Server may also compute or verify the final location estimate. para [0206] Referring to FIG. 7, LPP may be used as a point-to-point between a location server (E-SMLC and/or SLP and/or LMF) and a target device to position the target device (UE and/or SET) based on position-related measurements obtained from one or more reference sources. The target device and the location server may exchange measurement and/or location information based on signal A and/or signal B through the LPP. [0236] For example, the target device and the location server may exchange capability information, assistance data for positioning, and/or location information with each other through the LPP protocol.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee with the Wang, as a whole, so as to configure location Server to compute or verify the location estimate of the terminal, the motivation is to improve the positioning of the terminal.
Regarding claim 23, Wang further discloses the method of claim 22, wherein: the response includes the verified location of the UE, and the response further includes a type of the location server-based positioning procedure (see, Fig. 20, procedures for DL positioning, , 5b and procedures for UL positioning, 5c).
Regarding claim 25, Wang further discloses the method of claim 22, wherein the request includes: an identifier of the UE (Fig. 20, the MO-LR request, mobile originated location), an indication of a region in which the UE is expected to be located, one or more accuracy parameters, a timer within which the location server is expected to provide the response, or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 26, Wang further discloses the method of claim 22, wherein the response includes: the response includes the indication that the location of the UE is verified, a type of the location server-based positioning procedure, a quality of service (QoS), an error cause, an amount of time taken to determine the verified location of the UE, a confidence value indicating a confidence in the verified location of the UE, or any combination thereof (see, para [0018], QoS such as accuracy and latency supported).
Regarding claim 27, Wang further discloses the method of claim 26, wherein the error cause comprises a value indicating: denied positioning, unsupported by UE, positioning failed, or request timeout (since the claim upon which this claim depends recites options for steps written in the alternative and the option to which this claim directed is not the one for which prior art is cited, no art need be cited in the rejection of this claim).
Regarding claim 28, Wang further discloses a radio access network (RAN) node, comprising: a memory; at least one transceiver; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the at least one transceiver, the at least one processor configured to: receive, via the at least one transceiver, a request from a core network node to verify a location of a user equipment (UE) verified by the UE (see, Fig. 13, LMF sends RAN , 100 the request for location for UE); perform a RAN-based positioning procedure with the UE to determine a verified location of the UE (RAN, 100 performs the location measurement configuration, 801 and obtain measurements in step 5 and location measurement report in step 6); and transmit, via the at least one transceiver, a response to the core network node, the response including: measurements obtained by the UE during the RAN-based positioning procedure, measurements obtained by the RAN node during the RAN-based positioning procedure, the verified location of the UE, an indication that the location of the UE is verified, or any combination thereof (see, Fig. 13, the RAN 100 sends location report to the LMF/AMF).
Wang does not disclose verify location reported by the UE as underlined above, However, in same field of endeavor, Lee teaches in Fig. 7, the target device, (UE/SET) reporting the location of the UE to the location server (LMF). Para [0154], A Location Server may also compute or verify the final location estimate. para [0206] Referring to FIG. 7, LPP may be used as a point-to-point between a location server (E-SMLC and/or SLP and/or LMF) and a target device to position the target device (UE and/or SET) based on position-related measurements obtained from one or more reference sources. The target device and the location server may exchange measurement and/or location information based on signal A and/or signal B through the LPP. [0236] For example, the target device and the location server may exchange capability information, assistance data for positioning, and/or location information with each other through the LPP protocol.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee with the Wang, as a whole, so as to configure location Server to compute or verify the location estimate of the terminal, the motivation is to improve the positioning of the terminal.
Regarding claim 29, Wang further discloses the RAN node of claim 28, wherein the response further includes a type of the RAN-based positioning procedure (see, para [0018], type of location services).
Claim(s) 3, 14,16, 24 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Lee and further in view of Padaki et al. (US 2021/0058744) (hereafter Padaki).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses the method, wherein: the response includes the indication that the location of the UE is verified (see, Fig. 13, location response), But the combined teachings do not explicitly disclose the indication that the location of the UE is verified comprises a Boolean value, and the response further includes a confidence value indicating a confidence in the verified location of the UE. However, in same field of endeavor, Padaki teaches in para [0302], the UE performs the ranging measurements of the signals from the at least one anchor node, updates state probabilities based on a dynamic mode or likelihood values that are computed from the ranging measurements, and generates, based on the likelihood values, confidence values indicating a probability of a location of a target anchor node among the at least one anchor node in a cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Padaki with the Wang and Lee, as a whole, so as to calculate the confidence value associated with location measurements, the motivation is to improve the positioning.
10. Claim(s) 4, 5 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Lee and further in view of Wu et al. (US 2022/0369065)(hereafter WU).
Regarding claim 4 and 17, the combined teachings do not disclose the method, further comprising: transmitting a capability message to the core network node, the capability message indicating that the RAN node is capable of verifying the location of the UB. However, in same field of endeavor, Wu teaches in para [0122], UE 205 (e.g., the target device whose position is to be determined) and/or base station 215 (e.g., the NG-RAN) may report to location server (e.g., the network entity, such as AMF 225 and/or LMF 230) the capability of PC5 assisted positioning (i.e., the target device can be positioned based on the location of an associated UE (e.g., the V-UE, which is UE 210 in this example). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu with the Wang and Lee, as a whole, so as to configure the RAN to transmit the capability information to the core network, the motivation is to side link assisted cellular based positioning.
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings further disclose the method of claim 4, wherein: the RAN node has a steerable spare beam (see, para [0083], base station, 105 using beamforming).
11. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Lee and further in view of Shrestha et al. (US2021/0288756)(hereafter Shrestha).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings do not disclose the method, wherein the RAN node is or is located on a space vehicle. However, in same field of endeavor, Shrestha teaches in para [0050], A non-terrestrial base station may be located on a platform, which may be, for example, a satellite (e.g., a low earth orbit (LEO) satellite, a medium earth orbit (EO) satellite, a geostationary earth orbit (GEO) satellite, or the like), therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shrestha with the Wang and Lee, as a whole, so as to configure RAN node to be part of space vehicle as claimed, the motivation is to yield predictable results {KSR:- Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention}.
12. Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Lee and further in view of Jung et al. (US 2023/0199911) (hereafter Jung).
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings do not disclose the method, wherein the subsequent UE location verification procedure is not triggered based on the location of the UE changing during radio resource control (RRC) state transitions less than a threshold. However, in same field of endeavor, Jung, para [0055], a RRC connection suspend configuration in the group RRC release message may include information of a condition or event (e.g., a threshold related to the current serving cell link quality) when a corresponding UE should execute the RRC connection release based on a corresponding RRC connection suspend configuration (e.g., the SuspendConfig-r18 at 506) and transition to the RRC inactive state. In an implementation, a conditional release may be introduced, where the conditional release, such as to the RRC inactive state, is by a corresponding UE in the group when one or more release conditions are met, such as the UE transitioning to the RRC inactive state if the current serving cell quality drops below a configured threshold. The UE can start evaluating the execution condition(s) upon receiving the conditional group release configuration, and the UE stops evaluating the execution condition(s) once a release is executed, such as a transition to the RRC inactive state. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jung with the Wang and Lee, as a whole, so as to verify the UE location depending upon RRC state transitions, the motivation is to improve the location determination.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAVAL V PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1818. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday (8:00am-4:30pm).
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, Hannah Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/DHAVAL V PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631