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 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-16, and 21-23 are pending in the application, where claims 2 and 17-20 have been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment overcomes the drawing objections and 112(b) rejections from the previously filed Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner’s suggestions for Applicant to overcome 103 prior art rejections are included later in this Office Action.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the USC § 102 rejection of claims 9-12 are moot based on a new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for the USC § 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues on pg. 14 of the Remarks,
“Lee discloses a (transmitter) ID, a ranging request signal may include group ID information or target ID information, application ID information, or service ID information. However, Lee's "(transmitter) ID" is used as an input parameter for a REQ_SIG transmission resource hopping function for (implicit) checking, and is not used to distinguish between an observation UE and a target UE, and cannot constitute a teaching or suggestion of the claimed "identifier of the observation UE" and "identifier of the target UE." Therefore, Lee does not disclose or suggest "the identifier comprises an identifier of the observation UE and an identifier of the target UE" as recited in amended claim 1”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s specification contains no description of “an identifier” other than the identifier includes “an identifier of an observation UE and an identifier of a target UE” (see Applicant specification, pg. 18 paragraph 0167). Lee does disclose an identifier, as Lee discloses different service/application IDs for receiver UEs being included in the ranging request signal. See Lee pg. 18, paragraphs 0305-0307,
“Accordingly, the ranging request signal may include (GROUP) ID information (of the transmitter).
(Example #3-2) APPLICATION ID information (or SERVICE ID information).
For example, according to an application (or service), requirements related to distance measurement accuracy may be different from each other. Accordingly, the ranging request signal may include ID information for an application (or service)”
The “application” or “service” could be an observation or target role for a UE. These sections of Lee suggest a distinction between UE roles/services, and ID information about these roles are included in a ranging request signal. Examiner acknowledges that although Lee discloses a UE identifier, Lee does not disclose specifically an observation or target UE role/identifier. The teachings of Ko disclose an identifier, with further specification of an identifier of an observation UE and a target UE in particular, which will be explained in detail in the next section of this Office Action.
Further regarding the USC § 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues on pg. 16 of the Remarks,
“Ko describes a UE determining whether to accept a server role based on a received role request and its own conditions (e.g., channel utilization ratio, channel busy ratio, location information reliability). And Ko specifically describes a second UE deciding whether to accept a sidelink positioning message based on various threshold conditions (e.g., RSRP, channel busy ratio). According to Ko, when a UE decides whether to accept a role, it is based on threshold conditions, not on identifier matching. Therefore, Ko does not disclose or suggest "determining, by the ranging UE, that the ranging role of the ranging UE is the observation UE, wherein an identifier of the ranging UE is consistent with the identifier of the observation UE; or determining, by the ranging UE, that the ranging role of the ranging UE is the target UE, wherein the identifier of the ranging UE is consistent with the identifier of the target UE" as recited in amended claim 1”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As previously stated in section 4 of this Office Action, Applicant’s specification contains no description of a UE “identifier”. Based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, a list of requirements used to identify a UE, such as what is disclosed Ko, may qualify as an “identifier”. Ko discloses a request signal containing threshold requirements for a UE in order for the UE to qualify as an observation UE or target UE. If the UE’s conditions match the requirements of the request signal, the UE can be identified as an observation UE or a target UE. Accordingly in Ko, the “identifier” is the threshold requirements. The threshold condition requirements determine if the UE is an observation UE or a target UE, therefore determining the ranging role of the UE. The language of “identifier” from the claims, and the language of “identifier matching” from the Remarks, may include the threshold condition matching disclosed in Ko. These threshold requirements/conditions are used to identify the UE. An “identifier of the observation UE” may be a list of thresholds a UE must meet in order to be considered an observation UE. An “identifier of the target UE” may be a list of thresholds a UE must meet in order to qualify as a target UE. If the UE of interest meets these threshold requirements, its ranging role can be determined from the matching of the threshold requirements, or the matching of the “identifier”. Therefore, Ko does disclose a UE determining its ranging role based on identifier matching, the “identifier” being threshold conditions/requirements.
The combination of the identifiers in the request signal disclosed in Lee would be obvious to combine with the identifying threshold matching process from Ko in order to confirm the UE’s abilities to perform as an observation UE or target UE, improving communication efficiency by making sure the UEs are capable of performing the ranging role that is requested of them. The request signal can include UE identifying information (as seen in Lee), and that UE identifying information can determine a UE’s role (as seen in Ko).
The same rationale for the 103 rejection of amended claim 1 is applied to the amended claim 9.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for the USC § 103 rejection of claim 15, Applicant argues on pg. 19 of the Remarks,
“According to Figs. 4 and 5 of Lee, Lee depicts that an AMF contains a NAS layer and that two AMFs can communicate with each other via a gNB, which is merely a general architecture. Lee does not disclose a mechanism where one AMF queries and selects another AMF. Therefore, Lee does not disclose or suggest "taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving an observation UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the observation UE" as recited in amended claim 15.
Further, Lee also fails to disclose or suggest "taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving a target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving a target UE; or taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving any one of an observation UE and a target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the target UE and the AMF serving the observation UE." as recited in amended claim 15.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The language of amended claim 15 doesn’t disclose an AMF querying and selecting another AMF, but rather discloses that an AMF can query another AMF, then determine that the queried AMF will be the “first AMF”. Applicant’s specification further elaborates on AMF query abilities in paragraph 0113 of the specification,
“At this time, the second AMF serving the ranging initiating UE queries a unified data management (UDM) according to the identifier of the observation UE and the identifier of the target UE.”
The cited NPL from the previous office action, specifically Waite; “Non-Access Stratum”, shows that the general architecture of Lee is capable of querying an AMF/UDM. Waite discloses under the “Connection Establishment” section of NPL “Non-Access Stratum”,
“Connection establishment is a vital process managed by the non-access stratum (NAS) to initiate communication between user equipment (UE) and the core network. This process begins when the UE powers on or moves into a new network area. The UE sends a request to the network, which includes necessary identification and authentication details. The NAS then verifies these details to ensure the user is authorised to access the network… Connection establishment also involves setting up security protocols to protect the data being transmitted. By efficiently managing these initial steps, NAS ensures that users can quickly and securely connect to the network, paving the way for seamless mobile communication.”
Waite further discloses under “Role in Mobile Networks”,
“The role of the non-access stratum (NAS) in mobile networks is indispensable. Acting as the intermediary between the user equipment (UE) and the core network, NAS ensures robust communication and connection management. It handles vital functions like mobility management, allowing users to move seamlessly between cells without losing connectivity. Additionally, NAS takes care of session management, which is crucial for establishing, maintaining, and terminating data sessions. NAS is responsible for establishing IP connectivity between the user equipment and the core network, enabling the UE to access network services. This includes managing IP addresses and ensuring data flows smoothly;”
The general architecture disclosed in Lee is able to perform the general AMF query actions of amended claim 15. An AMF can verify a UE and its authorization with a NAS. If an AMF is receiving signals from another AMF on behalf of a UE, the first AMF can verify that the UE is qualified to continue signal communications. An AMF can query, or verify, another AMF through both AMFs’ NASs. The AMFs are able to query, or verify, data management information, such as identifiers and authorizations, and they are able to communicate with each other. It is reasonable to believe that the AMFs can query each other for information using the architecture disclosed in Lee, the architecture comprising an AMF with a NAS component.
Further regarding the last two parts of amended claim 15, "taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving a target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving a target UE; or taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving any one of an observation UE and a target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the target UE and the AMF serving the observation UE.", a rejection of the first part of the amended section of the claim is sufficient to reject the entire amended section of the claim because of the language structure of the claim. When the method comprises steps A, B, or C, prior art disclosure of A is sufficient to reject the entire claim, and prior art mappings/disclosure of B and C are not necessary.
For at least these reasons, Examiner is unpersuaded and maintains previous rejections corresponding to the USC § 103 rejections. Therefore, the Examiner asserts that Lee et al. (US 20200275244 A1) and Ko et al. (US 20220236365 A1) disclose each and every limitation of independent claims 1, 9, and 15 based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1, 9, and 15.
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 8 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, 3-16, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20200275244 A1) in view of Ko et al. (US 20220236365 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses [Note: what Lee fails to disclose is strike-through]
A ranging method (see pg. 13, paragraph 0201, “As one of the methods, a one-way ranging method may be provided, and as another method, a two-way ranging method may be provided”), comprising:
receiving, by a ranging user equipment (UE), a ranging service request sent by a ranging initiating UE (see Fig. 15; pg. 13, paragraph 0204, “a first UE…may receive a ranging request signal from a second UE”), wherein the ranging service request comprises an identifier (see pg. 15, paragraph 0248, “the ranging request signal may include at least one of information on ID of the second V2X UE, application ID information, or location information of the second V2X UE”; pg. 17, paragraphs 0302 and 0303, the ranging request signal may include ID information; pg. 18, paragraphs 0305-0307, more ID information that may be included in the ranging request signal) and a ranging parameter (see Fig. 16, S1630 request signal includes distance measurement related parameter);
performing, by the ranging UE, ranging according to the ranging parameter and the ranging role (see pg. 8, paragraph 0130, “a particular entity on the network (e.g., a vehicle and/or a UE) may measure the distance from another entity”; pg. 19, paragraph 0347, “the first UE may perform transmission of the distance measurement signal”; pg. 14, paragraph 0236, the first UE can perform distance measurement via signal reception based on the received request signal; pg. 18, paragraph 0328, the first UE can use distance measurement to see if the second UE is nearby);
wherein the identifier comprises an identifier (see pg. 4, paragraph 0083, the UEs can send group destination ID to each other; pg. 17, paragraph 0303, the ranging request signal can include group ID information or target ID information; pg. 18, paragraph 0306, the ranging request signal can include application ID information or service ID information; pg. 17, paragraph 0293, receiver can check transmitter ID; pg. 18, paragraphs 0305-0307, more ID information that may be included in the ranging request signal), wherein determining, by the ranging UE, the ranging role of the ranging UE according to the identifier in the ranging service request comprises one of:
Ko discloses
determining, by the ranging UE, a ranging role of the ranging UE according to the identifier (see pg. 11, paragraph 0169, “For example, the target UE may request that UEs around the target UE perform a server role. For example, the target UE may transmit a message requesting to perform a server role”; pg. 11, paragraph 0171, a UE “may receive a request for a server role …and transmit a response rejecting the server role”; pg. 11, paragraph 0175, “the UE for which the server role is requested may determine whether to accept/reject the participation”), wherein the ranging role comprises an observation UE or a target UE; and (see pg. 10, paragraph 0158, “the UE may be divided into two types of roles. For example, a target UE may be defined as a UE that is a target of location estimation. For example, a server UE may be defined as a UE that performs an operation to assist in estimating the location of a target UE”)
wherein the identifier comprises an identifier of the observation UE and an identifier of the target UE (see pg. 12, paragraph 0180, the UE can determine a role, such as server UE or target UE, based on information from the transmitting UE, such as the UE can determine a server role based on if a threshold value is met, “For example, the threshold value may be configured differently based on the LBS to be provided by the target UE through positioning or being provided to the target UE through positioning.”; pg. 10, paragraph 0158, “the UE may be divided into two types of roles. For example, a target UE may be defined as a UE that is a target of location estimation. For example, a server UE may be defined as a UE that performs an operation to assist in estimating the location of a target UE”; pg. 15, paragraph 0209, “For example, the pre-configured threshold value may be determined differently based on a service related to sidelink positioning of the first device 100.”, summary of all possible threshold values a UE must meet; see pg. 11, paragraph 0174, “For example, the threshold value may be provided by the target UE through positioning. For example, the threshold value may be configured differently according to a location based service (hereinafter referred to as LBS). For example, the threshold value may be pre-configured based on a service. For example, the threshold value may be pre-configured or configured by a base station or a target UE”; pg. 14, paragraph 0197, “For example, based on the embodiment of FIGS. 18 to 22 described above, the target UE or the base station may transmit a LBS related to the sidelink positioning or a QoS related to the LBS to the server UE through a message transmitted from the target UE to the server UE. For example, the server UE may determine a threshold value based on the corresponding LBS or QoS related to the LBS. For example, the target UE or base station may determine a predefined or pre-configured threshold value based on a QoS related to the corresponding LBS, and may transmit the determined threshold value to the server UE.”)
determining, by the ranging UE, that the ranging role of the ranging UE is the observation UE, wherein an identifier of the ranging UE is consistent with the identifier of the observation UE (see pg. 12, paragraph 0180, the UE can determine a server role based on information from the transmitting UE, such as the UE can determine a server role based on if its channel utilization ratio meets a threshold value; pg. 15, paragraph 0209, for summary of all possible threshold values a UE must meet to become a server UE); or
determining, by the ranging UE, that the ranging role of the ranging UE is the target UE, wherein the identifier of the ranging UE is consistent with the identifier of the target UE.
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Both Lee and Ko are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose communication between UEs using AMFs to improve UE communication and positioning efficiency. Lee discloses a ranging method that includes a UE receiving a ranging request that includes an identifier and ranging parameter, and then performing ranging based on information from the request; however, Lee fails to disclose a UE determining a ranging role based on information from the request and the identifier comprising an observation UE identifier and a target UE identifier. This feature is disclosed by Ko where a UE can receive a request and then accept or reject the request, ultimately determining the role of the UE, where the UE role determination as a target UE or server UE is based on received information, including a received request with identifier thresholds. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve UE communication efficiency by allowing the UEs to determine for themselves a ranging role based on available parameters that would best serve the communication of the wireless system as a whole.
Regarding claim 3, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining, by the ranging UE, the target UE according to the identifier of the target UE (see pg. 4, paragraph 0083, the UEs can send group destination ID to each other; pg. 17, paragraph 0303, the ranging request signal can include group ID information or target ID information; pg. 18, paragraph 0306, the ranging request signal can include application ID information or service ID information; pg. 17, paragraph 0293, receiver can check transmitter ID); and
performing, by the ranging UE, ranging on the target UE according to the ranging parameter (see pg. 8, paragraph 0130, “a particular entity on the network (e.g., a vehicle and/or a UE) may measure the distance from another entity”; pg. 14, paragraph 0236, the first UE can perform distance measurement via signal reception based on the received request signal; pg. 18, paragraph 0328, the first UE can use distance measurement to see if the second UE is nearby).
Regarding claim 4, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending, by the ranging UE, a ranging result to the ranging initiating UE (see Fig. 15, first UE can send ranging response signal back to second UE; pg. 19, paragraph 0347, the first UE can transmit a distance measurement signal back to the initiating UE).
Regarding claim 5, Ko further discloses
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining, by the ranging UE, the observation UE according to the identifier of the observation UE (see Fig. 18, a target UE can request and confirm a server UE role; pg. 11, paragraph 0171, a UE “may receive a request for a server role …and transmit a response rejecting the server role”; pg. 11, paragraph 0175, “the UE for which the server role is requested may determine whether to accept/reject the participation”); and
sending, by the ranging UE, the ranging parameter to the observation UE, wherein the observation UE performs ranging on the ranging UE according to the ranging parameter (see Fig. 17, UEs can send positioning assistance data among each other in S1730 and then transfer positioning information in S1750).
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose observation UEs being identified and then receiving ranging parameters to then perform ranging on another UE. This feature is disclosed by Ko where an observation UE can be identified and then receive positioning assistance data to help perform ranging. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve UE and data collection efficiency by quickly identifying UEs and sharing parameters among UEs to allow them to more efficiently fulfil their ranging roles.
Regarding claim 6, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the ranging UE, the ranging service request sent by the ranging initiating UE via a core network device serving the ranging UE (see Fig. 4, example system structure that proves connection to a terminal; pg. 4, paragraph 0074, “The gNB and the eNB are connected to a 5G core network (5GC) via an NG interface”).
Regarding claim 7, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 6, further comprising:
receiving, by the ranging UE, the ranging service request sent by a first access and mobility management function (AMF) serving the ranging UE (see Fig. 4, example system structure with AMFs capable of communicating with UEs).
Regarding claim 8, Ko further discloses
The method of claim 1, wherein the ranging initiating UE is the observation UE or the target UE (see Fig. 18, the initiating UE that sends a positioning request can be the target UE).
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose that the initiating UE can be the observation or target UE. This feature is disclosed by Ko where the initiating UE can be the target UE. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to optimize UE efficiency and decrease production costs by having one UE be able to perform multiple roles, such as ranging initiating and being a target UE.
Regarding claim 9, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied. Lee further discloses
A ranging method (see pg. 13, paragraph 0201, “As one of the methods, a one-way ranging method may be provided, and as another method, a two-way ranging method may be provided”), comprising:
sending, by a ranging initiating user equipment (UE), a ranging service request to a ranging UE (see Fig. 15; pg. 13, paragraph 0204, “a first UE…may receive a ranging request signal from a second UE”),
Regarding claim 10, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 9, further comprising:
receiving, by the ranging initiating UE, a ranging result sent by the ranging UE (see Fig. 15, first UE can send a ranging response signal to initiating UE).
Regarding claim 11, Lee further discloses [Note: what Lee fails to disclose is strike-through]
The method of claim 10, wherein the identifier of the ranging service request comprises an identifier (see pg. 4, paragraph 0083, the UEs can send group destination ID to each other; pg. 17, paragraph 0303, the ranging request signal can include group ID information or target ID information; pg. 18, paragraph 0306, the ranging request signal can include application ID information or service ID information; pg. 17, paragraph 0293, receiver can check transmitter ID).
Ko discloses
wherein the identifier of the ranging service request comprises an identifier of the observation UE and an identifier of the target UE (see pg. 12, paragraph 0180, the UE can determine a role, such as server UE or target UE, based on information from the transmitting UE, such as the UE can determine a server role based on if a threshold value is met, “For example, the threshold value may be configured differently based on the LBS to be provided by the target UE through positioning or being provided to the target UE through positioning.”; pg. 10, paragraph 0158, “the UE may be divided into two types of roles. For example, a target UE may be defined as a UE that is a target of location estimation. For example, a server UE may be defined as a UE that performs an operation to assist in estimating the location of a target UE”; pg. 15, paragraph 0209, “For example, the pre-configured threshold value may be determined differently based on a service related to sidelink positioning of the first device 100.”, summary of all possible threshold values a UE must meet; see pg. 11, paragraph 0174, “For example, the threshold value may be provided by the target UE through positioning. For example, the threshold value may be configured differently according to a location based service (hereinafter referred to as LBS). For example, the threshold value may be pre-configured based on a service. For example, the threshold value may be pre-configured or configured by a base station or a target UE”; pg. 14, paragraph 0197, “For example, based on the embodiment of FIGS. 18 to 22 described above, the target UE or the base station may transmit a LBS related to the sidelink positioning or a QoS related to the LBS to the server UE through a message transmitted from the target UE to the server UE. For example, the server UE may determine a threshold value based on the corresponding LBS or QoS related to the LBS. For example, the target UE or base station may determine a predefined or pre-configured threshold value based on a QoS related to the corresponding LBS, and may transmit the determined threshold value to the server UE.”)
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee discloses a UE identifier in the ranging service request; however, Lee fails to disclose specifically an observation UE identifier and a target UE identifier. These features are disclosed by Ko where an identifier, such as a threshold value requirement, of an observation UE and a target UE can be included in the request signal. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve UE communication efficiency by ensuring that the UEs perform their respective ranging roles according to their capabilities.
Regarding claim 12, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 9, further comprising:
discovering, by the ranging initiating UE, the ranging UE by means of a direct communication, and sending, by the ranging initiating UE, the ranging service request to the ranging UE (see pg. 22, paragraph 0402, “The sidelink is a UE-to-UE interface for sidelink communication and/or sidelink discovery”).
Regarding claim 13, Ko discloses
The method of claim 10, further comprising:
receiving, by the ranging initiating UE, the ranging result sent by a second access and mobility management function (AMF) serving the ranging initiating UE, wherein the ranging result is sent by the ranging UE to the second AMF via a first AMF (see Fig. 2, AMFs 30 are capable of communicating with a UE 10 via base stations 20; pg. 3, paragraph 0057, each UE may have its own AMF communication system, “The embodiment of FIG. 2 may be combined with various embodiments of the present disclosure”; Fig. 12, another detailed example of a UE communication network with AMFs; pg. 8, paragraph 0127, another entity “may provide a location service response to the AMF”; pg. 8, paragraph 0129, positioning protocol messages can be transmitted between an AMF and a UE; Fig. 25, multiple UEs communicating to each other via base stations).
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose an AMF sending and receiving ranging results to and from a UE. This feature is disclosed by Ko where UEs can be in communication with AMFs that are capable of receiving location service responses. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve UE communication and decrease production costs by having a standard wireless network including UEs and AMFs that is able to be mass produced for other UEs, allowing a standard form and quality of communication across devices.
Regarding claim 14, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 8 are applied.
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses [Note: what Lee fails to disclose is strike-through]
A ranging method (see pg. 13, paragraph 0201, “As one of the methods, a one-way ranging method may be provided, and as another method, a two-way ranging method may be provided”), comprising:
(see pg. 15, paragraph 0248, “the ranging request signal may include at least one of information on ID of the second V2X UE, application ID information, or location information of the second V2X UE”; pg. 17, paragraphs 0302 and 0303, the ranging request signal may include ID information; pg. 18, paragraphs 0305-0307, more ID information that may be included in the ranging request signal) and a ranging parameter (see Fig. 16, S1630 request signal includes distance measurement related parameter);
sending, by the second AMF, the ranging service request to the ranging UE via the first AMF (see Fig. 4, example system structure with AMFs capable of communicating with UEs; see Fig. 15; pg. 13, paragraph 0204, “a first UE…may receive a ranging request signal from a second UE”).
wherein determining, by the second AMF, the first AMF corresponding to the ranging UE according to the identifier comprises:
taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving an observation UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the observation UE (see Fig. 5, NAS [non access stratum] security element within the AMF; Fig. 4, two AMFs can communicate with each other via gNB):
taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving a target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the target UE; or
taking, by the second AMF, an AMF serving at least one of the observation UE and the target UE as the first AMF, wherein the second AMF queries the AMF serving the at least one of the target UE and the observation UE.
Ko discloses
receiving, by a second access and mobility management function (AMF), a ranging service request sent by a ranging initiating UE (see Fig. 12, AMFs communicatively coupled to a UE; pg. 7, paragraph 0118, an AMF may receive a request for a location service from a different entity; Fig. 2, AMFs 30 are capable of communicating with a UE 10 via base stations 20; pg. 3, paragraph 0057, each UE may have its own AMF communication system, “The embodiment of FIG. 2 may be combined with various embodiments of the present disclosure”; Fig. 12, another detailed example of a UE communication network with AMFs; pg. 8, paragraph 0129, positioning protocol messages can be transmitted between an AMF and a UE),
determining, by the second AMF, a first AMF corresponding to a ranging UE according to the identifier (see Fig. 13, UE procedures 3b include communication between UE and AMF; pg. 8, paragraph 0132, an AMF may take into consideration routing ID when sending messages);
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee discloses a ranging method that includes a ranging service requesting comprising of an identifier and a ranging parameter, sending a ranging service request from a UE to another UE via AMFs, and an AMF able to query another AMF; however, Lee fails to disclose receiving a ranging service request via an AMF and AMFs determining other AMFs with an identifier. This feature is disclosed by Ko where an AMF can receive a request for a location service and take into account routing ID when dealing with messages. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve UE communication and decrease production costs by having a standard wireless network including UEs and AMFs that is able to be mass produced for other UEs, allowing a standard form and quality of communication across devices. That’s why it would be beneficial and obvious for the UEs disclosed in Lee to communicate with each other via the AMFs disclosed in Ko.
Regarding claim 16, Lee further discloses
The method of claim 15, further comprising:
receiving, by the second AMF, a ranging result sent by the ranging UE via the first AMF; and
sending, by the second AMF, a ranging result to the ranging initiating UE (see Fig. 15, first UE can send a ranging response signal to initiating UE).
Regarding claim 21, Lee further discloses
A terminal device (see Fig. 26, example of a wireless communication device), comprising:
a transceiver (see Fig. 26, transceivers 113 and 123);
a memory (see Fig. 26, memory elements 112 and 122); and
a processor connected to the transceiver and the memory, respectively, and configured to perform the method of claim 1 (see Fig. 26, processors 111 and 121; pg. 20, paragraph 0373, “The processor 121 performs the above-described functions, procedures, and/or methods”).
Regarding claim 22, Lee further discloses
A core network device (see Fig. 26, example of a wireless communication device with eNB/network node/wireless device; pg. 4, paragraph 0074, “The gNB and the eNB are connected to a 5G core network), comprising:
a transceiver (see Fig. 26, transceivers 113 and 123);
a memory (see Fig. 26, memory elements 112 and 122); and
a processor connected to the transceiver and the memory, respectively, and configured to perform the method of claim 15 (see Fig. 26, processors 111 and 121; pg. 20, paragraph 0371, “The processor 111 performs the above-described functions, procedures, and/or methods…The memory 112 is connected to the processor 111 and stores various types of information and/or commands”).
Regarding claim 23, Ko discloses
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the method of claim 1 (see pg. 16, paragraph 0216, “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions may be provided”).
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 Ko into the invention of Lee. Lee fails to disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions that can carry out the ranging method. This feature is disclosed by Ko where the invention includes a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions that can carry out the ranging method. The combination of Lee and Ko would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to store data and information to allow a device to carry out the ranging method between UEs.
Examiner suggestions to overcome 103 rejections
Examiner would like point to Fig. 3 and paragraph 0113 of the Applicant’s specification as potential subject matter that could overcome the 103 prior art rejections if added to the independent claims.
Regarding Fig. 3, the UDM and UDR structure of the 3GPP control plane is not found in Lee nor Ko. Examiner believes adding these particular elements with the AMF elements from claim 15 would overcome the current prior art rejection by explicitly stating the architecture of the claimed invention, which is different from the architecture of the current prior art. Regarding paragraph 0113 of the specification,
“At this time, the second AMF serving the ranging initiating UE queries a unified data management (UDM) according to the identifier of the observation UE and the identifier of the target UE.”
Examiner suggests adding a method step of an AMF querying a UDM according to the identifier. The combination of the AMF elements and UDM/UDR elements would be sufficient to overcome the current prior art if added to all independent claims.
Examiner would also like to remind Applicant that addition of new subject matter would require further search and consideration from the Examiner.
Additional Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure and may be found on the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
Waite, Paul; Non-Access Stratum which relates to the authentication and security control abilities of a NAS
Conclusion
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 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 EST.
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, William Kelleher can be reached at (571) 272-7753. 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 AMEYALI EDRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648