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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in reply to an application filed on 10/24/2023. Claims 1-30 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 3/12/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below.
The Applicant argues , mid-page 2 of arguments:
There is no suggestion at all in Maattanen that establishes a user physically pointing a UE antenna towards the satellite would be necessary or even helpful. Hence there is no suggestion in Maattanen for providing such haptic feedback to assist a user to point a UE towards a satellite. Moreover, Maattanen provides examples of UE device types and is not related to NTN systems at all.
In response, the examiner respectfully submits:
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s interpretation that the haptic feedback cannot be used to assist a user to point a UE towards a satellite. First, the rejection is based on a combination of Maattanen in view of Zlogar and not just Maattanen.
Maattanen, in Fig. 1, and para[0011]-[0014], teaches and suggest a UE in a two-way communication with a satellite , wherein the satellite links are operated in line-of-sight conditions, and indicates that the ephemeris data that is provided to UE, is to assist the UE to point its directional antenna or antenna beams, towards the satellite. As such, it is understood that such ephemeris data that is provided to UE (i.e., haptic feedback) is to assist a UE with pointing its directional antenna or an antenna beam, towards the satellite.
Last, Maattanen indeed teaches NTN and in para[0016] indicates that signaling “ephemeris data” (i.e., haptic data) are used in NTN (Non-Terrestrial Network).
The Applicant argues bottom-page 3 and bottom-5 of arguments:
In Zlogar, a mobile device may be used as an alignment device to help orient a satellite antenna. The mobile device outputs images/sounds to help orient the satellite antenna, but the satellite antenna is a totally separate device from the mobile device. Hence Zlogar merely suggest the use of the mobile device to help with the installation of an external (fixed) satellite antenna. This is different from a line of sight (LOS) alignment between an antenna of the UE with a satellite antenna as recited in independent claim 1.
In response, the examiner respectfully submits:
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s interpretation of Zlogar and reasons as why Examiner relied on Zlogar for the rejection. Examiner’s reliance on Zlogar was not to indicate the satellite antenna being the same as the mobile device as Applicant argues. As it has been indicated, Maattanen teaches and suggests UE can receive an input or feedback from a remote device such as haptic feedback that causes vibration, however, Maattanen does not explicitly disclose that a difference between current orientation of UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) versus any target orientation of UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) can be determined, prior to UE receiving the feedback (i.e., haptic feedback or vibration instruction), as understood by:
determining a current orientation associated with the UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); determining difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) associated with a difference between the current orientation of the UE (i.e., current satellite antenna LOS condition) and the target orientation of the UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); and that is based on the difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) and
However, Zlogar teaches an “alignment device” (i.e., a UE/MS) which receives LOS sensor data and determines antenna misalignment/obstruction by comparing current LOS sensor data with stored LOS sensor data representing a first/initial good LOS condition that it has received and using that difference (emphasis added) for alignment action. It further teaches that a mobile device (i.e., a UE) can perform the same functions of the “alignment device” as well, which can be understood as UE/MS as able to perform the same mentioned tasks and use that difference for alignment action.
Information Disclosure Statement PTO-1449
The Information Disclosure Statement submitted by applicant on 03/12/2026 have all been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Form PTO-1449 signed and attached hereto.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-7, 9-11, 13, 15-25, 27, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20240019583 A1 to Maattanen (hereinafter Maattanen) in view of US 10359496 B2 to Zlogar et al., (hereinafter Zlogar).
Claim 1. A method of operating a user equipment (UE), comprising:
determining a target orientation associated with the UE for a two-way satellite communication session (i.e., assist UE with pointing UE directional antenna towards satellite) that provides a line of sight (LOS) alignment between an antenna of the UE with a satellite antenna; (i.e., UE pointing its directional antenna towards a satellite’s antenna, wherein established communication links are operated in line-of-sight (LOS) conditions)
(Maattanen: See Fig. 1, and para[0011]-[0014], two-way communication with satellite links are operated in line-of-sight conditions, wherein ephemeris data provided to UE, is to assist the UE with pointing its directional antenna or antenna beam, towards the satellite)
transmitting, to a user feedback component, (i.e., vibrator) an instruction to provide user feedback (i.e., instruction to vibrate) that comprises non-visual user feedback (i.e., haptic feedback/vibration (i.e., non-visual feedback)) or visual feedback that is separate from a display screen of the UE.
(Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include a vibrator that creates vibration and hence provides a user with haptic feedback.)
Although, Maattanen teaches and suggests UE can receive an input or feedback from a remote device (i.e., satellite) such as haptic feedback that causes vibration, however, it does not explicitly disclose that a difference between current orientation of UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) versus any target orientation of UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) can be determined, prior for UE to receive feedback (i.e., haptic feedback or vibration instruction), as understood by:
determining a current orientation associated with the UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); determining difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) associated with a difference between the current orientation of the UE (i.e., current satellite antenna LOS condition) and the target orientation of the UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); and that is based on the difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) and
However, in a similar field, Zlogar, in Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, describing the use of LOS sensor to determine whether an antenna’s beam is obstructed or misaligned, wherein the alignment device of a satellite determines that a “difference” between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, as misalignment or obstruction of antenna.
Furthermore, see Fig. 14, #1420, and Fig.15, #1515, #1535, #1550, and Col. 17, lines 1-25, describing “alignment device” for a satellite that receives LOS sensor data and determines antenna misalignment/obstruction by comparing current LOS sensor data with stored LOS sensor data representing a first/initial good LOS condition, and using that difference to drive alignment action/feedback. Also, see Col. 22, lines 35-50, that teaches the mobile device (UE) may also be configured to perform the same functions of the “alignment device” of satellite as well.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the user feedback component (i.e., vibrator) is integrated as part of the UE. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may be or have a vibrator)
Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the user feedback component (i.e., vibrator) is integrated in a device that is separate from the UE. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may have a vibrator)
Claim 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the device is a wearable device, or wherein the device comprises a display screen associated with a vehicle. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, or any other device (i.e., a car’s navigation system, a wearable device, etc.) may be or have a vibrator, or a UE may be or have a vibrator, etc.)
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the difference information comprises the difference between the current orientation of the UE and the target orientation of the UE, or wherein the difference information comprises whether a change in orientation of the UE is converging towards the target orientation or is moving away from the target orientation, or a combination thereof. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred.)
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the user feedback (i.e., vibrator) comprises the non-visual user feedback. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration (i.e., non-visual user feedback) to provide a user with haptic feedback)
Claim 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the non-visual user feedback comprises: haptic feedback, or audio feedback, or a combination thereof. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration (i.e., non-visual user feedback) to provide a user with haptic feedback)
Claim 9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: outputting, before the two-way satellite communication session, training data to assist a user of the UE with respect to an initial candidate orientation of the UE for the LOS alignment. (Zlogar: See Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, a satellite alignment device, that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data (i.e., training data) to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred, upon which it sends message to mobile device. It is understood that this process can be repeated many time as needed.)
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the display screen of the UE remains off while the user feedback is output to the UE by the user feedback component. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration (i.e., non-visual user feedback) to provide a user with haptic feedback)
Claim 11. The method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, to another user feedback component (i.e., another vibrator), an additional instruction to provide additional user feedback (i.e., another haptic user feedback) associated with the LOS alignment. (Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include multiple vibrators that creates vibration and hence provides a user with haptic feedback.)
Claim 13. The method of claim 1, wherein the user feedback comprises coded information, or wherein the user feedback comprises a pattern, or a combination thereof. (Zlogar: See Col. 16, lines 25-35, warning messages sent, can be a text message (i.e., coded information), or any other means of notification (emphasis added))
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 15. A user equipment (UE), 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 (see Fig. 5, #120 processing circuitry coupled to RF transceiver, and device readable medium (memory)) configured to:
determine a target orientation associated with the UE for a two-way satellite communication session (i.e., assist UE with pointing UE directional antenna towards satellite) that provides a line of sight (LOS) alignment between an antenna of the UE with a satellite antenna; (i.e., UE pointing its directional antenna towards a satellite’s antenna, wherein established communication links are operated in line-of-sight (LOS) conditions)
(Maattanen: See Fig. 1, and para[0011]-[0014], two-way communication with satellite links are operated in line-of-sight conditions, wherein ephemeris data provided to UE, is to assist the UE with pointing its directional antenna or antenna beam, towards the satellite)
transmit, via the at least one transceiver, to a user feedback component (i.e., vibrator), an instruction to provide user feedback (i.e., instruction to vibrate) and that comprises non-visual user feedback (i.e., haptic feedback/vibration ( non-visual feedback)) or visual feedback that is separate from a display screen of the UE.
(Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback.)
Although, Maattanen teaches and suggests UE can receive an input or feedback from a remote device (i.e., satellite) such as haptic feedback that causes vibration, however, it does not explicitly disclose that a difference between current orientation of UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) versus any target orientation of UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) can be determined, prior for UE to receive feedback (i.e., haptic feedback or vibration instruction), as understood by:
determine a current orientation associated with the UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); determine difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) associated with a difference between the current orientation of the UE (i.e., current satellite antenna LOS condition) and the target orientation of the UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); and that is based on the difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS)
However, in a similar field, Zlogar, in Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, describing the use of LOS sensor to determine whether an antenna’s beam is obstructed or misaligned, wherein the alignment device of a satellite determines that a “difference” between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, as misalignment or obstruction of antenna.
Furthermore, see Fig. 14, #1420, and Fig.15, #1515, #1535, #1550, and Col. 17, lines 1-25, describing “alignment device” for a satellite that receives LOS sensor data and determines antenna misalignment/obstruction by comparing current LOS sensor data with stored LOS sensor data representing a first/initial good LOS condition, and using that difference to drive alignment action/feedback. Also, see Col. 22, lines 35-50, that teaches the mobile device (UE), (in addition to satellite) may also be configured to perform the same functions of an “alignment device” of satellite as well.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a UE that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, as to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 16. The UE of claim 15, wherein the user feedback component is integrated as part of the UE. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may have a vibrator)
Claim 17. The UE of claim 15, wherein the user feedback component is integrated in a device that is separate from the UE. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may have a vibrator)
Claim 18. The UE of claim 17, wherein the device is a wearable device, or wherein the device comprises a display screen associated with a vehicle. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, or any other device (i.e., a car’s navigation system, etc.) may be or have a vibrator, or a UE may be or have a vibrator)
Claim 19. The UE of claim 15, wherein the difference information comprises the difference between the current orientation of the UE and the target orientation of the UE, or wherein the difference information comprises whether a change in orientation of the UE is converging towards the target orientation or is moving away from the target orientation, or a combination thereof. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred.)
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a UE that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 20. The UE of claim 15, wherein the user feedback (i.e., vibrator) comprises the non-visual user feedback. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator (i.e., non-visual user feedback) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may be or have a vibrator)
Claim 21. The UE of claim 20, wherein the non-visual user feedback comprises: haptic feedback, or audio feedback, or a combination thereof. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator (i.e., non-visual user feedback) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. See Fig. 5, wireless device (i.e., UE) having various components. As such, it is understood that a switch or motor, may be a vibrator, or a UE may be or have a vibrator)
Claim 23. The UE of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: output, before the two-way satellite communication session, training data to assist a user of the UE with respect to an initial candidate orientation of the UE for the LOS alignment.
(Zlogar: See Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, a satellite alignment device, that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data (i.e., training data) to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred, upon which it sends message to mobile device. It is understood that this process can be repeated many time as needed.)
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 24. The UE of claim 15, wherein the display screen of the UE remains off while the user feedback is output to the UE by the user feedback component. (Maattanen: see para[0145] UE may be a motor, switch, or any other device that may change states in response to receiving an input via wireless connection. UE may be a vibrator that creates vibration (i.e., non-visual user feedback) to provide a user with haptic feedback)
Claim 25. The UE of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, via the at least one transceiver, to another user feedback component, an additional instruction to provide additional user feedback associated with the LOS alignment.
(Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include multiple vibrators that creates vibration and hence provides a user with haptic feedback.)
Claim 27. The UE of claim 15, wherein the user feedback comprises coded information, or wherein the user feedback comprises a pattern, or a combination thereof. (Zlogar: See Col. 16, lines 25-35, warning messages sent, can be a text message (i.e., coded information), or any other means of notification (emphasis added))
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 29. A user equipment (UE), comprising: means for determining a target orientation associated with the UE for a two-way satellite communication session (i.e., assist UE with pointing UE directional antenna towards satellite) that provides a line of sight (LOS) alignment between an antenna of the UE with a satellite antenna; (i.e., UE pointing its directional antenna towards a satellite’s antenna, wherein established communication links are operated in line-of-sight (LOS) conditions)
(Maattanen: See Fig. 1, and para[0011]-[0014], two-way communication with satellite links are operated in line-of-sight conditions, wherein ephemeris data provided to UE, is to assist the UE with pointing its directional antenna or antenna beam, towards the satellite)
means for transmitting, to a user feedback component (i.e., vibrator), an instruction to provide user feedback (i.e., instruction to vibrate) and that comprises non-visual user feedback (i.e., haptic feedback/vibration (i.e., non-visual feedback)) or visual feedback that is separate from a display screen of the UE.
(Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include a vibrator that creates vibration and hence provides a user with haptic feedback.)
Although, Maattanen teaches and suggests UE can receive an input or feedback from a remote device (i.e., satellite) such as haptic feedback that causes vibration, however, it does not explicitly disclose that a difference between current orientation of UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) versus any target orientation of UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) can be determined, prior for UE to receive feedback (i.e., haptic feedback or vibration instruction), as understood by:
means for determining a current orientation associated with the UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); means for determining difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS) associated with a difference between the current orientation of the UE (i.e., current satellite antenna LOS condition) and the target orientation of the UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)); and that is based on the difference information (i.e., a difference between current LOS and the first/initial good LOS)
However, in a similar field, Zlogar, in Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, describing the use of LOS sensor to determine whether an antenna’s beam is obstructed or misaligned, wherein the alignment device of a satellite determines that a “difference” between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, as misalignment or obstruction of antenna.
Furthermore, see Fig. 14, #1420, and Fig.15, #1515, #1535, #1550, and Col. 17, lines 1-25, describing “alignment device” for a satellite that receives LOS sensor data and determines antenna misalignment/obstruction by comparing current LOS sensor data with stored LOS sensor data representing a first/initial good LOS condition, and using that difference to drive alignment action/feedback. Also, see Col. 22, lines 35-50, that teaches the mobile device (UE), (in addition to satellite) may also be configured to perform the same functions of an “alignment device” of satellite as well.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claim 30. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a user equipment (UE), cause the UE to:
determine a target orientation associated with the UE for a two-way satellite communication session (i.e., assist UE with pointing UE directional antenna towards satellite) that provides a line of sight (LOS) alignment between an antenna of the UE with a satellite antenna; (i.e., UE pointing its directional antenna towards a satellite’s antenna, wherein established communication links are operated in line-of-sight (LOS) conditions)
(Maattanen: See Fig. 1, and para[0011]-[0014], two-way communication with satellite links are operated in line-of-sight conditions, wherein ephemeris data provided to UE, is to assist the UE with pointing its directional antenna or antenna beam, towards the satellite)
transmit, to a user feedback component (i.e., vibrator), an instruction to provide user feedback (i.e., instruction to vibrate) and that comprises non-visual user feedback (i.e., haptic feedback/vibration (i.e., non-visual feedback)) or visual feedback that is separate from a display screen of the UE.
(Maattanen: See para[0145] UE may be a vibrator (i.e., a user feedback component) that creates vibration to provide a user with haptic feedback. “UE” may be a motor, switch, or any other device (i.e., emphasis added) that may change states in response to receiving an input (i.e., feedback) via its wireless connection. It is understood that a mobile device can include a vibrator that creates vibration and hence provides a user with haptic feedback.)
Although, Maattanen teaches and suggests UE can receive an input or feedback from a remote device (i.e., satellite) such as haptic feedback that causes vibration, however, it does not explicitly disclose that a difference between current orientation of UE (i.e., misaligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) versus any target orientation of UE (i.e., aligned antenna line-of-sight (LOS)) can be determined, prior for UE to receive feedback (i.e., haptic feedback or vibration instruction), as understood by:
determine a current orientation associated with the UE; determine difference information associated with a difference between the current orientation of the UE and the target orientation of the UE; and that is based on the difference information
However, in a similar field, Zlogar, in Fig. 6, Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, describing the use of LOS sensor to determine whether an antenna’s beam is obstructed or misaligned, wherein the alignment device of a satellite determines that a “difference” between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, as misalignment or obstruction of antenna.
Furthermore, see Fig. 14, #1420, and Fig.15, #1515, #1535, #1550, and Col. 17, lines 1-25, describing “alignment device” for a satellite that receives LOS sensor data and determines antenna misalignment/obstruction by comparing current LOS sensor data with stored LOS sensor data representing a first/initial good LOS condition, and using that difference to drive alignment action/feedback. Also, see Col. 22, lines 35-50, that teaches the mobile device (UE), (in addition to satellite) may also be configured to perform the same functions of an “alignment device” of satellite as well.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included line-of-sight sensor, as taught by Zlogar, with the teachings of Maattanen, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a satellite that can determined a difference between a second LOS sensor data and a first good LOS sensor data, to conclude or determine that a misalignment or obstruction of antenna has occurred. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Claims 8, 12, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20240019583 A1 to Maattanen (hereinafter Maattanen) in view of US 10359496 B2 to Zlogar et al., (hereinafter Zlogar) and in further view of US 20140192247 A1 to Cheong et al., (hereinafter Cheong).
Claim 8. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teaches the method of claim 7, however, they do not explicitly teach that the haptic feedback can have a frequency or intensity that is based on speed of an object, and how fast the object is moving, as understood by:
wherein the user feedback (i.e., another intense haptic feedback) is indicated based on an amplitude or intensity of the haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or wherein the user feedback (i.e., another intense haptic feedback ) is indicated based on a speed or frequency of the haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or wherein the user feedback is indicated based on spatial information associated with of haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or a combination thereof.
However, in a similar field, Cheong in para[0105] teaches haptic feedback having intensity or frequency, wherein such intensity or frequency of haptic feedback depends on speed of an object and when the object moves fast and further away.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Cheong teaches camera operation based on haptic function wherein a terminal may output a haptic feedback having an intensity or frequency that depends on the speed if an object moves fast and further away. ( Cheong: See para[0105])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included haptic feedback intensity, as taught by Cheong, with the teachings of Maattanen in view of Zlogar, in order to benefit from enhancement of haptic feedback intensity being associated with the speed of an object when the object moves fast and further away. (Cheong: See para[0105])
Claim 12. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teaches the method of claim 11, however, they do not explicitly disclose that the haptic feedback can have a frequency or intensity that is based on speed of an object, and how fast the object is moving, as understood by:
wherein the additional user feedback (another more intense haptic feedback) indicates that the UE is being moved too fast.
However, in a similar field, Cheong in para[0105] teaches the terminal may output a haptic feedback wherein the haptic intensity or frequency depends on speed when the object moves fast and further away.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Cheong teaches camera operation based on haptic function wherein a terminal may output a haptic feedback having an intensity or frequency that depends on the speed if an object moves fast and further away. (Cheong: See para[0105])
Claim 22. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teaches the UE of claim 21, however, they do not explicitly teach that the haptic feedback can have a frequency or intensity that is based on speed of an object, and how fast the object is moving, as understood by:
wherein the user feedback is indicated based on an amplitude or intensity of the haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or wherein the user feedback is indicated based on a speed or frequency of the haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or wherein the user feedback is indicated based on spatial information associated with of haptic feedback, the audio feedback, or both, or a combination thereof.
However, in a similar field, Cheong in para[0105] teaches haptic feedback having intensity or frequency, wherein such intensity or frequency of haptic feedback depends on speed of an object and when the object moves fast and further away.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Cheong teaches camera operation based on haptic function wherein a terminal may output a haptic feedback having an intensity or frequency that depends on the speed if an object moves fast and further away. ( Cheong: See para[0105])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included haptic feedback intensity, as taught by Cheong, with the teachings of Maattanen in view of Zlogar, in order to benefit from enhancement of haptic feedback intensity being associated with the speed of an object when the object moves fast and further away. (Cheong: See para[0105])
Claim 26. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teaches the UE of claim 25, however, they do not explicitly disclose that the haptic feedback can have a frequency or intensity that is based on speed of an object, and how fast the object is moving, as understood by:
wherein the additional user feedback indicates that the UE is being moved too fast.
However, in a similar field, Cheong in para[0105] teaches the terminal may output a haptic feedback wherein the haptic intensity or frequency depends on speed when the object moves fast and further away.
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Cheong teaches camera operation based on haptic function wherein a terminal may output a haptic feedback having an intensity or frequency that depends on the speed if an object moves fast and further away. ( Cheong: See para[0105])
Claims 14 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20240019583 A1 to Maattanen (hereinafter Maattanen) in view of US 10359496 B2 to Zlogar et al., (hereinafter Zlogar) and in further view of US 2023016351 A1 to Prasad et al., (hereinafter Prasad).
Claim 14. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: detecting an obstruction between the antenna of the UE and the satellite antenna; and
(Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, teaches
a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna.)
Although Maattanen in view of Zlogar teach that warning messages sent, can be any means of notification (Zlogar: See Col. 16, lines 25-35) however, they do not explicitly disclose such notificatrion can be navitational instruction as to avoid an obstruction, as understood by:
outputting navigation instructions to assist a user of the UE to maneuver to a location that bypasses the obstruction.
However, in a similar field, Prasad, in para[0090] teaches navigation instruction provided to a driver of a vehicle (i.e., a user of the UE), includes position of obstructions and a trajectory path as to avoid the obstruction. (Prasad: See para[0090])
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Prasad teachings includes providing navigation instruction to a driver of a vehicle (i.e., a user of the UE), that includes position and location of obstructions, and a trajectory path as to avoid such obstructions. (Prasad: See para[0090])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included navigation instruction, as taught by Prasad, with the teachings of Maattanen in view of Zlogar, in order to benefit from enhancement of having another form of warning messages that can be sent to a user, that specifically identify obstructions, their location/position, as well as suggesting a path as to avoid such obstructions. (Prasad: See para[0090])
Claim 28. Maattanen in view of Zlogar teach the UE of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: detect an obstruction between the antenna of the UE and the satellite antenna; and
(Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20, teaches
a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna.)
Although Maattanen in view of Zlogar teach that warning messages sent, can be any means of notification (Zlogar: See Col. 16, lines 25-35) however, they do not explicitly disclose such notificatrion can be navitational instruction as to avoid an obstruction, as understood by:
output navigation instructions to assist a user of the UE to maneuver to a location that bypasses the obstruction.
However, in a similar field, Prasad, in para[0090] teaches navigation instruction provided to a driver of a vehicle (i.e., a user of the UE), includes position of obstructions and a trajectory path as to avoid the obstruction. (Prasad: See para[0090])
Maattanen teaches methods and systems for signaling ephemeris data from a satellite that assist UE with pointing a directional antenna or an antenna beam towards satellite considering line-of-sight communications. (Maattanen: See para0011] and para[0014])
Zlogar teaches satellite antenna having a line-of-sight (LOS) sensor for antenna LOS detection, wherein a determined difference between the second LOS sensor data and the first good LOS sensor data, indicates a misalignment or obstruction of antenna. (Zlogar: See Col. 1 lines 65-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-20)
Prasad teachings includes providing navigation instruction to a driver of a vehicle (i.e., a user of the UE), that includes position and location of obstructions, and a trajectory path as to avoid such obstructions. (Prasad: See para[0090])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to have included navigation instruction, as taught by Prasad, with the teachings of Maattanen in view of Zlogar, in order to benefit from enhancement of having another form of warning messages that can be sent to a user, that specifically identify obstructions, their location/position, as well as suggesting a path as to avoid such obstructions. (Prasad: See para[0090])
Conclusion
8. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 MAJID ESMAEILIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7830. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gregory Sefcheck can be reached on 571-272-3098. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M. E./
Examiner, Art Unit 2477
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
