Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/373,224

POSITIONING METHOD, TERMINAL, AND NETWORK-SIDE DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 26, 2023
Examiner
TORRES, MARCOS L
Art Unit
2647
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
465 granted / 692 resolved
+5.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
744
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 692 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of species I, claims 2-3 in the reply filed on 12-15-2025 is acknowledged. Claim Objections Claims 1-3 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: not all acronyms are described the claims. For example, for SIB, present it as system information block (SIB) at least once. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-3 and 20 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. The claims present a plurality of conditional limitations which are unclear when one ends and the next one begins. Also, some conditional limitations are dependent on limitations or situations which are not required; thereby, it is unclear how the limitation can be true, if the prior condition cannot be true. Please clarify. Additionally, see Ex Parte Schulhauser, MPEP 2111.04 II. 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. Claim(s) 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by QUALCOMM INCORPORATED: "Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State", as cited by applicant. As to claim 1, Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State discloses positioning method, comprising: performing, by a terminal, a positioning behavior in an idle state or an inactive state (Section 1, paragraph starting with "The following enhancements have been recommended for normative work - NR positioning for UEs in RRC_INACTIVE state, including - DL, UL and DL+UL positioning methods"), wherein performing the positioning behavior comprises at least one of the following: receiving and measuring a downlink reference signal for positioning (Figure 1, step 13a and respective description on page 5); reporting information related to location (Figure 1, step 14 and respective description on page 6); transmitting an uplink reference signal for positioning (Figure 1, step 12 and respective description on page 5); [not required conditions] when a distance between a time domain location of an uplink reference signal for positioning to be transmitted and a paging occasion exceeds a distance X, ignoring, by the terminal, the uplink reference signal for positioning to be transmitted; when a distance between a time domain location of a downlink reference signal for positioning and the paging occasion exceeds the distance X, ignoring, by the terminal, measurement of the downlink reference signal for positioning; when a distance between a time domain location where information related to location is reported and the paging occasion exceeds the distance X, ignoring, by the terminal, reporting of the information related to location; or when a distance between the time domain location of the uplink reference signal for positioning to be transmitted and the time domain location of the downlink reference signal for positioning exceeds the distance X, ignoring, by the terminal, the uplink reference signal for positioning to be transmitted, wherein the paging occasion is a paging occasion in a resident cell. Regarding claim 20 is the corresponding device claim of method claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as shown above. 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. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State in view of Kim 20200313832. As to claim 2, Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the receiving and measuring the downlink reference signal for positioning comprises: when the terminal is configured with an initial downlink bandwidth part (BWP) (since the reference disclose positioning where the UE is in RRC IDLE/RRC INACTIVE state, therefore it is implied that it operates/ it is active on the initial Downlink BWP; section 1), performing, by the terminal, one of the following: receiving a downlink reference signal for positioning (Figure 1, step 13a and respective description on page 5). The above reference fails to explicitly disclose inside of the downlink BWP. In an analogous art Kim discloses receiving a downlink reference signal for positioning with the same parameter configuration as the downlink BWP inside of the downlink BWP (the new BWP correspond to a bandwidth used to transmit RS/SS is transmitted inside the BWP… The structure of the PSS/SSS mentioned above may be identical to the first structure) (see par. 0154); [not required conditions] when the downlink reference signal for positioning and a first signal are repeated or collided or transmitted in the same symbol, skipping receiving, by the terminal, the downlink reference signal for positioning, the first signal comprising at least one of the following: SIB 1, other SIBs than SIB1, Msg2, MSg4, MsgB, a PDCCH scheduling SIB1, or a synchronization signal block SSB; receiving the downlink reference signal for positioning inside of the initial downlink BWP; receiving, by the terminal, the downlink reference signal for positioning outside of the initial downlink BWP; or performing, by the terminal, BWP handover according to an indication from a network-side device, a protocol agreement, or a selection of the terminal, and receiving the downlink reference signal for positioning on the BWP after handover. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the teachings for the simple purpose of using the bandwidth efficiently and save the finite wireless resources. Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State in view of Wang 20220394526. As to claim 3, Positioning of UEs in RRC Idle/Inactive State discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the receiving and measuring the downlink reference signal for positioning comprises: receiving and measuring the downlink reference signal for positioning according to a relation between the downlink reference signal for positioning, indicated by a network-side device, between the downlink reference signal for positioning (Figure 1, step 13a and respective description on page 5). The previous reference fails to disclose SSB. In an analogous art Wang discloses according to a spatial beam relation between the downlink reference signal for positioning and an SSB, wherein the spatial beam relation between the downlink reference signal for positioning and the SSB is obtained by a spatial QCL relation (see par. 0064), indicated by a network-side device (see fig.2-3), between the downlink reference signal and the SSB (see par. 0144, 0152); or [not required conditions] obtained by a default relation between a downlink reference signal for positioning resource and an SSB actually transmitted in synchronization signal block burst under a TRP where the downlink reference signal for positioning resource is located. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the teachings for the simple purpose of using the bandwidth efficiently and save the finite wireless resources. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F. 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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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. MARCOS L. TORRES Primary Examiner Art Unit 2647 /MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 26, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598454
DYNAMIC CONFIGURATION OF AN ELECTRONIC SUBSCRIBER IDENTIFICATION MODULE IN A VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12563496
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF FOR SETTING TARGET WAKE TIME PARAMETERS BASED ON RESPONSE SIGNAL RECEIVED FROM EXTERNAL ELECTRONIC DEVICE OF DIFFERENT BASIC SERVICE SET
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563491
CHANNEL ACCESS MECHANISM FOR LOW POWER WAKE-UP RECEIVERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12542846
PHONE CASE FOR TRACKING AND LOCALIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12532289
LOCATION CALIBRATION METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+11.4%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 692 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month