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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 9-12, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vivo Mobile Communication (CN108645423A) in view of Li et al. (US Pat# 10,390,325).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 17, Vivo Mobile Communication teaches a display method performed by an electronic device, comprising receiving a user operation indicating to display a current location of the electronic device (Abstract and Description, navigation operation request); in response to the user operation, obtaining the current location of the electronic device (Abstract and Description, real-time dynamic positioning etc.); and displaying the at least two locations and a label on a map run on the electronic device, wherein the label is used to distinguish between the at least two locations (Abstract and Description, first and second markings of different locations and a third marking of the position between the two positions). Vivo Mobile Communication fails to teach at least two positioning methods.
Li teaches obtaining the current location of the electronic device by using at least two positioning methods to obtain at least two locations (Claim 15, first and second positioning methods etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate at least two positioning methods as taught by Li into Vivo Mobile Communication’s device in order to improve positioning accuracy.
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 18, the combination including Li teaches wherein positioning technologies used in the at least two positioning methods are different and/or devices for calculating locations in the at least two positioning methods are different (Claim 15, first and second positioning methods etc.).
Regarding claim 3, the combination including Li teaches wherein the label indicates a positioning technology that is used in at least one of the at least two positioning methods, or the label indicates a device for calculating at least one of the at least two locations (Claim 15, first and second technology positioning methods etc.).
Regarding claims 4 and 12, the combination including Li teaches wherein the obtaining the current location of the electronic device by using the at least two positioning methods comprises receiving a first location and a first identifier that are sent by a positioning device, wherein the first location is the current location of the electronic device obtained by the positioning device by using one of the at least two positioning methods, and the at least two locations comprise the first location (Abstract, Col. 1 line 58-Col. 3 line 37, and Claim 15, first and second technology positioning methods with identifiers etc.); and generating the label based on the first identifier (Abstract, Col. 1 line 58-Col. 3 line 37, and Claim 15, first and second technology positioning methods with identifiers etc.).
Regarding claim 7, the combination including Vivo Mobile Communication teaches wherein the displaying the at least two locations on the map comprises: separately displaying icons at the at least two locations on the map, wherein the icons displayed at the at least two locations have different colors and/or shapes (Description, increase color rendering etc.).
Regarding claims 9, 16, and 20, the combination including Vivo Mobile Communication teaches identifying a current environment based on the at least two locations; and determining, based on a correspondence between an environment and a positioning method, that a target location is a location obtained by using a positioning method corresponding to the current environment, wherein an icon displayed at the target location is different from an icon displayed at a location other than the target location among the at least two locations (Abstract and Description, real-time dynamic positioning for a navigation environment etc.).
Claims 5-6, 13-14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vivo Mobile Communication (CN108645423A) in view of Li et al. (US Pat# 10,390,325) and further in view of Thomas et al. (US Pat Pub# 2024/0072870).
Regarding claims 5, 13, and 19, Vivo Mobile Communication in view of Li teaches the limitations in claims 1, 10, and 17. However, Vivo Mobile Communication and Li fail to teach a 5G positioning method.
Thomas teaches a fifth generation positioning method using a 5G mobile communication technology, the at least two locations comprise a first location that is obtained by using the 5G positioning method (Section 0056, 5G positioning techniques).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a 5G positioning method as taught by Thomas into at least two positioning methods as taught by Li into Vivo Mobile Communication’s device in order to improve positioning accuracy.
Regarding claims 6, 14, and 19, Thomas further teaches wherein the at least two positioning methods comprise at least one second positioning method using at least one of the following communication technologies a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) positioning technology, a Bluetooth positioning technology, a wireless local area network (WLAN) positioning technology, a terrestrial beacon system (TBS) positioning technology, a barometer, or an ultra wide band (UWB) technology; the at least two locations comprise at least one second location that is obtained by using the at least one second positioning method (Sections 0114, 0182, 0228, and 0252, Global Navigation Satellite System).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vivo Mobile Communication (CN108645423A) in view of Li et al. (US Pat# 10,390,325) and further in view of Jun (JP 2011-38883A).
Regarding claim 8, Vivo Mobile Communication in view of Li teaches the limitations in claim 1. However, Vivo Mobile Communication and Li fail to teach an error range.
Jun teaches displaying an error range of each of the at least two locations by using the location as a center (Claims, displaying positioning error range information etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an error range as taught by Jun into at least two positioning methods as taught by Li into Vivo Mobile Communication’s device in order to improve information to the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW WENDELL whose telephone number is (571)272-0557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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.
/ANDREW WENDELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 3/4/2026