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 Amendment
The amendment filed 02/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 103 rejections of independent claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Examiner would like to thank Attorney John Lastova for a helpful and productive interview on 01/15/2026. However, upon further search and consideration of new amendments, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 6459903 B1) in view of Hollar et al. (US 11856551 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses [Note: what Lee fails to disclose is strike-through]
An electronic device comprising (see Fig. 1 and 5):
a wireless communication circuit (see Fig. 5);
at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (see Fig. 1, location data processor 40; Fig. 5, TDOA phase processor); and
transmit a first positioning signal directly to a first external electronic device and receive a first response signal corresponding to the first positioning signal directly from the first external electronic device using the wireless communication circuit (see Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 4-6, “ Referring to FIG. 3, if the first BS 21, for example, transmits an RTD [Round Trip Delay] message to an MS [mobile station] of interest, the MS returns the RTD message to the BS 21.”);
identify, based on the received first response signal, a first separation distance between the electronic device and the first external electronic device and an angle of arrival between the electronic device and the first external electronic device (see Fig. 3; col. 3, lines 64-67, “In step s100, the distance (TOA) between an MS and each BS is calculated from a predetermined RTD (Round Trip Delay) message, for obtaining the first estimated location area.”; col. 4, lines 6-12, “The first BS 21 calculates the RTD of the message. Then, the TOA (t1) of the message between the MS and the first BS 21 is RTD/2… The circles having the BSs 21, 22, and 23 at their centers are drawn based on these calculated TOAs. The radii of these circles represent the respective TOAs.”; col. 2, lines 64-67, “the location of the MS is estimated based on the time of signals received through two antennas provided in each BS, and then the angle of arrivals of the signal with respect to the antennas of each BS and the MS is utilized.”; see Fig. 7, angle of arrival)
transmit, (see Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 4-10, “Referring to FIG. 3, if the first BS 21, for example, transmits an RTD message to an MS of interest, the MS returns the RTD message to the BS 21. The first BS 21 calculates the RTD of the message. Then, the TOA (t1) of the message between the MS and the first BS 21 is RTD/2. The TOAs (t2 and t3) of the BSs 22 and 23 are calculated in the same manner.”);
identify a second separation distance between the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device based on the received second response signal (see Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 4-10, “Referring to FIG. 3, if the first BS 21, for example, transmits an RTD message to an MS of interest, the MS returns the RTD message to the BS 21. The first BS 21 calculates the RTD of the message. Then, the TOA (t1) of the message between the MS and the first BS 21 is RTD/2. The TOAs (t2 and t3) of the BSs 22 and 23 are calculated in the same manner.”; col. 2, lines 2-5, “The network calculates the distance between the three BSs and the MS using the arrival time of the signal at the BSs, then determines the location of the MS using the trigonometry.”); and
identify a first overlapping region between a first radius region corresponding to the first separation distance and a second radius region corresponding to the second separation distance (see Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 12-15, “Ideally, the circles of the BSs 21, 22, and 23 meet at one point as shown in FIG. 3. The intersection point is estimated as the location of the MS.”; Fig. 4; col. 4, lines 20-26, “As depicted in FIG. 4, the varying TOAs from the center point of each BSs 21, 22, and 23 are represented by t1', t2', and t3'. Hence, these circles with the radii of the distance between the TOAs and the BSs 21, 22, and 23 intersect and overlap in a specific area, as shown in FIG. 4. Similarly, the MS is estimated to be located within this overlap area.”);
determine that the first external electronic device is located within a second overlapping, between the first overlapping region and a region corresponding to the angle of arrival (see Fig. 8; col. 4, lines 27-32, “It can be said that the MS is positioned within the estimated location area and as the location area is smaller, the location of the MS can be determined more accurately. Therefore, the estimated MS location area is narrowed based on an AOA in the present invention.”).
Hollar discloses
a memory (see Fig. 13, memory 1336),
wherein the memory stores instructions that, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively (see col. 14-15, lines 64-7, “The aforementioned flow logic and/or methods show the functionality and operation of various services and applications described herein. If embodied in software, each block may represent a module, segment, or portion of code that includes program instructions to implement the specified logical function(s). The program instructions may be embodied in the form of source code that includes human-readable statements written in a programming language or machine code that includes numerical instructions recognizable by a suitable execution system such as a processor in a computer system or other system.”), cause the electronic device to:
transmit, based on the first separation distance being determined to exceed a specified value, a second positioning signal (see Fig. 7; col. 9, lines 34-52, a device that is not in range of a tag can request tag location information from another device that is within range of the tag)
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hollar into the invention of Lee. Both Lee and Hollar are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose mobile device positioning methods. Lee discloses an electronic device, transmitting a first signal to a first external device, identifying a distance and AOA between the electronic device and the first external device, transmitting a second signal to a second external device, identifying a distance between the first external device and the second external device, identifying overlapping regions, and using received signals to determine the location of the first external device; however, Lee fails to disclose a memory that can store and execute instructions and a first distance exceeding a specific value. These features are disclosed by Hollar where if a device is out of range of a tag that the device wants to locate, the device can obtain tag location information from a different device. Hollar further discloses a memory that can store executable instructions. The combination of Lee and Hollar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve device location/position detection by using the help and advantage of other devices in proximity to the target device, so that even if the initial detecting device is far from the target device, it can still determine the target device’s location.
Regarding claim 2, Lee further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the second response signal includes information associated with a separation distance between the electronic device and the second external electronic device (see Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 4-10, “Referring to FIG. 3, if the first BS 21, for example, transmits an RTD message to an MS of interest, the MS returns the RTD message to the BS 21. The first BS 21 calculates the RTD of the message. Then, the TOA (t1) of the message between the MS and the first BS 21 is RTD/2. The TOAs (t2 and t3) of the BSs 22 and 23 are calculated in the same manner.”).
Regarding claim 3, Hollar discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
transmit the first positioning signal to the first external electronic device and transmit the second positioning signal to the second external electronic device based on an ultra-wideband (UWB) protocol (see col. 4, lines 37-40, device can have UWB transceiver).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hollar into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose a UWB protocol for transmitting signals. This feature is disclosed by Hollar where the electronic device can have a UWB transceiver for signal communications. The combination of Lee and Hollar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve device location/position detection by using modern communication protocols like UWB to make the positioning method suitable for modern electronic devices.
Regarding claim 4, Hollar discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
receive the second response signal corresponding to the second positioning signal from the second external electronic device based on a Bluetooth protocol (see col. 7, lines 45-48; col. 13, lines 29-31; claim 8, Bluetooth can be used to determine positioning)
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hollar into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose a Bluetooth protocol for receiving signals. This feature is disclosed by Hollar where the electronic device can use Bluetooth for positioning. The combination of Lee and Hollar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve device location/position detection by using modern communication protocols like Bluetooth to make the positioning method accessible to a variety of modern electronic devices.
Regarding claim 5, Lee further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the electronic device, the first external electronic device, and the second external electronic device belong to a same account or a same group (see Fig. 1, devices are part of the same group).
Regarding claim 6, Lee further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first radius region includes a substantially circular region with the electronic device as a center and the first separation distance as a radius, and the second radius region includes a substantially circular region with the second external electronic device as a center and the second separation distance as a radius (see Figs. 3-4 and 8).
Regarding claim 7, Lee further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
transmit the first positioning signal to the first external electronic device based on receiving a specified input,
wherein the specified input includes a touch input to a user interface for providing a function of searching for the location of the first external electronic device (see col. 2, lines 8-11, “Upon request for a location service about a specific mobile subscriber, i.e., MS by a user, the BSC 30 selects the BSs 21, 22, and 23 for use in the location service in order to locate the MS.”).
Regarding claim 8, Hollar discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the electronic device further includes a display,
and the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
display, on the display, guide information and information associated with a direction to a region in which the first external electronic device has been determined to be located with respect to the electronic device (see col. 9, lines 1-5, “Using geometry, smart phone 620 can calculate both the distance and the direction the tag 604 is in and can display that on the screen of smart phone 620. For example, an arrow may be shown on the screen in the direction of the tag 604.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hollar into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose a display for displaying the location of the first external electronic device. This feature is disclosed by Hollar where the device can display a location of the tag of interest. The combination of Lee and Hollar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to easily and efficiently display the device location to a user in order to help the user locate the device if it was missing, for example.
Regarding claim 9, the same cited sections and rationale from claims 1, 3, and 8 are applied. Hollar further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
identify, at specified intervals, the separation distance between the electronic device and the first external electronic device based on a UWB protocol (see col. 6, lines 16-27, “In some embodiments, the tag may send out transmit pings at a periodic rate.”),
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hollar into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose identifying a distance at specified intervals. This feature is disclosed by Hollar where the device can transmit signals periodically, and those signals can be used to determine distance. Hollar further discloses a UWB protocol, a display, and ranging distance limitations. The combination of Lee and Hollar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to periodically monitor the device’s location to detect movement in an efficient manner that reduces power usage. The device could transmit signals periodically, as disclosed in Hollar, and those signals can be used to determine distance, as disclosed in Lee.
Regarding claim 10, the same cited sections from claims 1 and 6 are applied. Lee further discloses
The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more of the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
transmit a third positioning signal to a third external electronic device and receive a third response signal corresponding to the third positioning signal from the third external electronic device using the wireless communication circuit (see Figs. 3, 4, and 8),
identify a third separation distance between the first external electronic device and the third external electronic device based on the received third response signal, and
determine that the first external electronic device is located within an overlapping region among the first radius region, the second radius region, and a third radius region corresponding to the third separation distance,
wherein the third radius region includes a substantially circular region with the third external electronic device as a center and the third separation distance as a radius.
Regarding claims 11-19, the same cited sections and rationale for claims 1-10 are applied. The only difference between claims 1-10 and claims 11-19 is that claims 1-10 refer to an apparatus while claims 11-19 refer to a method. The examiner considers Lee col. 1, lines 18-20 (“The present invention relates generally to a cellular mobile telecommunication network, and in particular, to a method and system for locating a mobile station (MS) ”) to show that the radar apparatus performs the radar method of claims 11-19.
Additional Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure and may be found on the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
US 20240118375 A1 (Dong) [included in previous Office Action]; A method includes a device in an area 1 that requests a ultra-wideband (UWB) base station in the area 1 to measure an initial position, and starts inertial measurement unit (IMU) measurement. The device moves to an area 2, and the device requests to measure distances between each UWB base station in the area 2 and at least three locations. The device returns to the area 1, and requests the UWB base station in the area 1 to measure an end point position. The device corrects coordinates of the device in the area 2 calculated using data obtained through the IMU measurement based on the measured end point position. Calculate the coordinates of each UWB base station in the area 2 based on the corrected coordinates in the area 2 and the measured distances between each UWB base station and the device in the area 2.
US 20230209308 A1 (Liang); Provided are an electronic device and a method performed by the electronic device connected with a mobile station. The method includes: acquiring a movement track of the mobile device moving to a target area; determining service content based on the acquired movement track; and providing a service to the mobile station in the target area, the service corresponding to the determined service content.
CN 111757256 A (Xiao); The invention claims an indoor positioning method and device, the method comprising: step one, pre-arranging at least three ultra-wideband base stations; the position of the base station is known; step two, pre-installing ultra-wideband transceiver device on the located object; step three, determining the distance value between the located object and the base station through the ultra-wideband transceiver; step four, calculating the position of the located object according to the distance value. The indoor positioning method and device of the invention, in the indoor environment, based on limited distance limit, using UWB distance measuring cost is low and the precision is high, the position error is within 0.1m. It can well solve the problem that the indoor satellite signal cannot be received, realizing indoor and outdoor seamless location.
WO 2019201864 A1 (Olsson); It is provided a method for determining a location of a mobile device. The method comprises the steps of: obtaining a first maximum distance between a first anchor point and the mobile device; generating a first circular geometrical object having a radius based on the first maximum distance; generating a first polytope encompassing the first circular geometric object, wherein all angles of the first polytope are right angles; obtaining a second maximum distance between a second anchor point and the mobile device; generating a second circular geometrical object having radius based on the second maximum distance; generating a second polytope encompassing the second circular geometric object, wherein all angles of the second polytope are right angles; finding a mobile device region as an overlap between the first polytope and the second polytope; and determining that the mobile device is located within the mobile device region.
US 20010053698 A1 (Karmi); A communication system comprises a reference base station which collects one or more signal features of a mobile station signal. The reference base station determines a first location parameter of the mobile station signal it receives. The reference base station forwards the signal features to an auxiliary base station. Using the signal features, the auxiliary base station creates a replica of the mobile station signal as transmitted by the mobile station. The auxiliary base station correlates the replica with a same mobile station signal as received at the auxiliary base station in order to determine a second set of signal features. The auxiliary base station uses the second set of signal features to determine a second location parameter. The position of the mobile station is determined using the first and second location parameters. The process may be repeated at a plurality of auxiliary base stations and for a plurality of different location parameters in order to improve the accuracy of the determination of mobile station location.; see Fig. 8
KR 20110136522 A (Choi); A mobile terminal position measuring method is provided to correct position information from a ToA(Time of Arrival) method using angle information between a base station and terminal, thereby significantly reducing position measurement errors. CONSTITUTION: A ToA(Time of Arrival) method is used in order to calculate first position information(S100). The first position information is corrected using angle information between a terminal and two base stations(S200). An AoA(Angle of Arrival) method is used in order to calculate second position information(S300). A position value of the terminal is calculated using the corrected first position information and second position information(S400).
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 ISABELLA A EDRADA whose telephone number is (571)272-4859. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9am-5pm ET.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/ISABELLA A EDRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights