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 claims filed on 4/7/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 11, 13-14, 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0322273 (Agnihotri et al.) in view of US 2024/0267880 (Hao) in view of US 2023/0354250 (Shimoda et al.).
As to claims 1 and 11, Agnihotri teaches a base station (404, fig 4B) in a wireless communication system, the base station comprising (see figure 4B): a transceiver; and a controller coupled to the transceiver, and configured to: receive, from a location management function (LMF) entity,
a transmission reception point (TRP) information request message including at least one requested TRP identification (ID) (see step 610, fig 6, and paragraphs 114 and 115, information TRPs specified by TRP IDs requested by LMF in TRP INFORMATION REQUEST), and
transmit, to the LMF entity based on at least one type of the TRP information, a TRP information response message including information on at least one TRP corresponding to the at least one TRP ID (see step 620, fig 6, and paragraphs 115 and 117, TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE can indicate that the TRP is mobile);
wherein the type of TRP information includes, a physical cell ID (PCI), a cell global identity (CGI), a frequency information absolute radio frequency channel number (ARFCN), configuration information on a positioning reference signal (PRS), information of a synchronization signal block (SSB), a spatial direction information, geographical coordinates, information about an on-demand PRS, TRP Tx timing error group (TEG) association information, and TRP location information (see paragraph 115).
What is lacking from Agnihotri is the TRP information request message including at least one requested type of TRP information such that the TRP information response is transmitted based on that at least one requested type TRP information.
In analogous art, Hao teaches an LMF sending a TRP information request to an access network device comprising a TRP information type (~requested type of TRP information) (see Hao, paragraph 221).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to ensure that TRP information is provided only as needed.
What is further lacking from Agnihotri is and wherein the TRP information response message includes location of the TRP, velocity of the TRP, and information on a time point at which the location of the TRP is obtained.
In analogous art, Shimoda teaches an LMF sending a TRP INFORMATION REQUEST comprising information about the content of a TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE comprising both the speed of a moving cell, measurement information and time information (see Shimoda, paragraphs 208-220, 247-257 and 301-302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF.
As to claims 6 and 16, Agnihotri teaches a location management function (LMF) (406, fig 4C) entity in a wireless communication system, the LMF entity comprising (see figure 4C): a transceiver; and a controller coupled to the transceiver, and configured to:
transmit, to a base station, a transmission reception point (TRP) information request message including at least one requested TRP identification (ID) (see step 610, fig 6, and paragraphs 114 and 115, information TRPs specified by TRP IDs requested by LMF in TRP INFORMATION REQUEST), and
receive, from the base station based on at least one type of TRP information, a TRP information response message including information on at least one TRP corresponding to the at least one TRP ID (see step 620, fig 6, and paragraphs 115 and 117, TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE can indicate that the TRP is mobile),
wherein the type of TRP information includes, a physical cell ID (PCI), a cell global identity (CGI), a frequency information absolute radio frequency channel number (ARFCN), configuration information on a positioning reference signal (PRS), information of a synchronization signal block (SSB), a spatial direction information, geographical coordinates, information about an on-demand PRS, TRP Tx timing error group (TEG) association information, and TRP location information (see paragraph 115).
What is lacking from Agnihotri is the TRP information request message including at least one requested type of TRP information such that the TRP information response is transmitted based on that at least one requested type TRP information.
In analogous art, Hao teaches an LMF sending a TRP information request to an access network device comprising a TRP information type (~requested type of TRP information) (see Hao, paragraph 221).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to ensure that TRP information is provided only as needed.
What is further lacking from Agnihotri is and wherein the TRP information response message includes location of the TRP, velocity of the TRP, and information on a time point at which the location of the TRP is obtained.
In analogous art, Shimoda teaches an LMF sending a TRP INFORMATION REQUEST comprising information about the content of a TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE comprising both the speed of a moving cell, measurement information and time information (see Shimoda, paragraphs 208-220, 247-257 and 301-302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF.
As to claims 3, 8, 13 and 18, what is lacking from Agnihotri is wherein the TRP information request message further includes indication information indicating a periodic report with period information, and wherein the TRP information response message is transmitted periodically based on the period information.
In analogous art, Shimoda teaches an LMF sending a TRP INFORMATION REQUEST comprising information inducing a periodic transmission of a TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE (see Shimoda, paragraphs 240, 247-257 and 301-302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF.
As to claims 4, 9, 14 and 19, what is lacking from Agnihotri is wherein the TRP information request message further includes indication information indicating an event driven report with threshold information, and wherein the TRP information response message is transmitted based on the threshold information.
In analogous art, Shimoda teaches an LMF sending a TRP INFORMATION REQUEST comprising information inducing event based transmission of a TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE based on various thresholds (see Shimoda, paragraphs 241-257 and 301-302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF.
Claims 5, 10, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agnihotri in view of Hao and Shimoda, applied to claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 above, and further in view of Well Known Prior Art (Official Notice).
As to claims 5 and 15, what is lacking from Agnihotri is wherein the controller is further configured to: in case that a cell is added or removed, transmit, to the LMF entity, the TRP information response message including information associated with the cell.
Examiner takes Official Notice that it was well known in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a base station managing multiple cells to add cells. This teaching in view of Agnihotri’s teachings would result in the TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE indicating TRP information corresponding to an added cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF.
As to claims 10 and 20, what is lacking from Agnihotri is wherein the controller is further configured to: in case that a cell is added or removed to the base station, receiving, from the base station, the TRP information response message including information associated with the cell.
Examiner takes Official Notice that it was well known in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a base station managing multiple cells to add cells. This teaching in view of Agnihotri’s teachings would result in the TRP INFORMATION RESPONSE indicating TRP information corresponding to an added cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Agnihotri, so as to improve the quality of the information provided by the base station to the LMF
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 MAZDA SABOURI whose telephone number is (571)272-8892. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am-7 pm.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/MAZDA SABOURI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights