DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
3. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 11/20/2025. Claims 1-60 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
4. The objections to claims 21-22, 28, 51-52 and 58 are corrected the amendment. Therefore, the objections are withdrawn.
5. Applicant arguments regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by REN et al. (US 20230299917) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner thoroughly reviewed Applicant’s arguments but firmly believes that the cited reference reasonably and properly meets the claimed limitation as rejected.
Applicant’s argument: First, the DL-PRS configuration is not sent by the serving base station to the UE at Step 404 of FIG. 4 of Ren. In actuality, the DL-PRS configuration is sent to the UE earlier at Step 402 of FIG. 4, e.g.:
[0410] Step 402: the LMF sends the SPS DL-PRS configuration information to the UE, the serving base station and the non-serving base station. (e.g., see [0410] of Ren, Emphasis added)
The signaling from the serving base station at Step 404 of FIG. 4 of Ren is not the DL-PRS configuration itself (which the UE already knows at this point), but rather contains the activation or trigger for the DL-PRS configuration.
For example, in many 3GPP standards, it is common for the DL-PRS configuration to be signaled via LPP or RRC, but the DL-PRS configuration is not active at all times (i.e., the activation occurs only during positioning sessions when the base station(s) are actually transmitting the DL-PRS). So, once configured, the DL-PRS configuration is activated at a lower layer via DCI or MAC CE from time to time. This is precisely what is disclosed by Ren in fact, e.g.:
[0324] ... the UE receives the SPS DL-PRS configuration information of the plurality of base stations configured the LMF via SPS through LPP signaling or RRC signaling.
[0326] the UE receives the SPS DL-PRS activation information of the plurality of base stations through DCI signaling or MAC-CE signaling. (e.g., see [0324], [0326] of Ren)
The activation trigger at Step 404 is a simple index field to the already-configured DL-PRS configuration that toggles the DL-PRS configuration to an active state (e.g., see [0383] of Ren).
Hence, Ren discloses a single DL-PRS configuration that is configured at a UE and later activated with respect to two DL-PRSs from two base stations, and not "a paired downlink positioning reference signal (DL-PRS) resource configuration for a first DL-PRS and a second DL-PRS that is offset in time from the first DL-PRS by a time offset" as recited in independent claim 1 and similarly recited in independent claims 16, 31, and 46
Second, the first and second DL-PRS activations disclosed with respect to FIG. 4 of Ren triggers a first DL-PRS from the serving base station and a second DL-PRS from a non-serving base station, i.e., different transmission sources. This is distinct from "first and second DL-PRSs associated with the same transmission source" as recited in independent claims 1, 16, 31, and 46.
Third, the Applicant notes that the Examiner also cites to [0388], [0391]-[0394] of Ren with respect to the "same transmission source" feature. The Applicant notes that the time offset discussed in this section of Ren is (i) configured by the DCI or MAC CE activation/trigger at Step 404 and is not part of the DL-PRS configuration at Step 402, and (ii) is relative to the DCI or MAC CE activation/trigger for the DL-PRS and not a time offset between DL-PRSs, e.g.:
[0392] As an optional embodiment, the SPS DL-PRS activation information in the embodiment of the application includes: the offset between the slot for activating the SPS DL-PRS in the DCI signaling or MAC-CE signaling and the slot in which the SPS DL- PRS is actually sent; and the downlink slot for sending the SPS DL-PRS corresponding to the offset.
Examiner’s response: The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument above. In figure 4 below, Ren shows “interaction between devices in the system for receiving and sending the downlink positioning reference signal” (par 0233).
PNG
media_image1.png
710
494
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In step 404 of figures 4 above, Ren show the serving base station send the first SPS DL-PRS activation information and second SPS DL-PRS activation information to the UE. Thus, figure 4 shows that the first and second DL-PRS are sent by the same transmission source (serving base station) to the UE. Also, in paragraph 0412, Ren teaches:
PNG
media_image2.png
242
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Also, in paragraph 0413, Ren teaches:
PNG
media_image3.png
178
628
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In paragraph 0388, Ren teaches “The SPS DL-PRS activation information in the embodiment of the application includes the activation occasion of the SPS DL-PRS and the sending occasion of the SPS DL-PRS, that is, the occasion information of which slot is used for activating the SPS DL-PRS and which slot is used for sending the SPS DL-PRS. Specifically, the SPS DL-PRS activation information may also include an offset between slots, where the offset refers to an offset between the slot for activating the SPS DL-PRS in the DCI signaling or MAC-CE signaling and the slot in which the SPS DL-PRS is actually sent, where the offset is used to indicate the SPS DL-PRS corresponding to the offset; and the SPS DL-PRS activation information in the embodiment of the application includes the downlink slot for sending the SPS DL-PRS corresponding to the offset.”
In paragraph 0391, Ren teaches “It should be noted that the offset in this embodiment corresponds to two types of resources. One case is that the offset corresponds to the SPS DL-PRS, and the other case is that the offset corresponds to the SPS DL-PRS set.”
In paragraph 0392, Ren teaches “As an optional embodiment, the SPS DL-PRS activation information in the embodiment of the application includes: the offset between the slot for activating the SPS DL-PRS in the DCI signaling or MAC-CE signaling and the slot in which the SPS DL-PRS is actually sent; and the downlink slot for sending the SPS DL-PRS corresponding to the offset.”
In paragraph 0393, Ren teaches “It is easy to understand that, in this case, the offset corresponds to the SPS DL-PRS, and each SPS DL-PRS is configured with one piece of offset information. If one slot includes a plurality of SPS DL-PRSs, then the plurality of SPS DL-PRSs correspond to different offsets. Sending/receiving of each SPS DL-PRS should be completed within the downlink slot indicated by the offset; and the UE may need to complete the receiving of a plurality of SPS DL-PRSs in different downlink slots during the period of one SPS DL-PRS.”
In paragraph 0394, Ren teaches “As an optional embodiment, the SPS DL-PRS activation information in the embodiment of the application includes: the offset between the slot for activating the SPS DL-PRS set in the DCI signaling or MAC-CE signaling and the slot in which the SPS DL-PRS set is actually sent, and the downlink slot for sending the SPS DL-PRS set corresponding to the offset.”
Thus, Ren does teach “receiving a paired downlink positioning reference signal (DL-PRS) resource configuration for a first DL-PRS and a second DL-PRS that is offset in time from the first DL-PRS by a time offset, the first and second DL-PRSs associated with the same transmission source” as recited in independent claims 1, 16, 31, and 46.
6. 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.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states:
A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-2, 9-11, 17-22, 26, 31-33, 39-41, 46-52 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by REN et al. (US 20230299917) (hereinafter Ren).
Regarding claims 1 and 31:
As shown in figures 1-16, Ren discloses a user equipment (UE) (see UE in figures 1-5), comprising:
a memory (502 in figure 5);
a communication interface (503 in figure 5); and
at least one processor (501 in figure 5) communicatively coupled to the memory (502 in figure 5) and the communication interface (503 in figure 5), the at least one processor (501 in figure 5) configured to:
receive, via the communication interface, a paired downlink positioning reference signal (DL-PRS) resource configuration for a first DL-PRS and a second DL-PRS (at step 404-405, Ren shows serving base station transmits first DL-PRS resource configuration and second DL-PRS resource configuration to the UE and the UE receives the first DL-PRS resource configuration and the second DL-PRS resource configuration) (par 0412-0413) that is offset in time from the first DL-PRS by a time offset, the first and second DL-PRSs associated with the same transmission source (par 0388, 0391-0394); and
perform a first measurement (see step 406 in figure 4) of the first DL-PRS and a second measurement of the second DL-PRS in accordance with the paired DL-PRS resource configuration (par 0412-0414).
Regarding claims 16 and 46:
As shown in figures 1-16, Ren discloses a position estimation entity (see serving base station in figures 1-4, 6), comprising:
a memory (602 in figure 6);
a communication interface (600 in figure 6); and
at least one processor (601 in figure 6) communicatively coupled to the memory (602 in figure 6) and the communication interface (600 in figure 6), the at least one processor (601 in figure 6) configured to:
determine a paired downlink positioning reference signal (DL-PRS) resource configuration for a first DL-PRS and a second DL-PRS (see steps 404-405 in figure 4) that is offset in time from the first DL-PRS by a time offset, the first and second DL-PRSs associated with the same transmission source (par 0388, 0391-0394, 0412-0413); and
cause the communication interface to transmit an indication of the paired DL-PRS resource configuration to a user equipment (UE) (at step 404-405, Ren shows serving base station transmits first DL-PRS resource configuration and second DL-PRS resource configuration to the UE and the UE receives the first DL-PRS resource configuration and the second DL-PRS resource configuration) (par 0412-0413).
Regarding claims 2 and 32:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are scheduled aperiodically, semi-periodically (par 0006), or periodically.
Regarding claims 3 and 33:
Ren further discloses wherein the paired DL-PRS resource configuration includes a first DL-PRS resource set with a given periodicity for the first DL-PRS, and a second DL-PRS resource set with the given periodicity for the second DL-PRS (par 0256, 0259, 0265).
Regarding claims 9 and 39:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second measurements correspond to receive-transmit (Rx-Tx) time difference measurements based on time stamps derivedon the same transmission reception point (TRP) and the same respective DL-PRS resources (par 0260).
Regarding claims 10 and 40:
Ren further discloses transmitting a measurement report comprising measurement information that is based on the first and second measurements (see step 406 in figure 4, par 0412-0414).
Regarding claims 11 and 41:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are scheduled periodically, and wherein the measurement information is associated with two or more periodic instances of the first DL-PRS and two or more corresponding instances of the second DL- PRS (par 0265).
Regarding claims 17 and 47:
Ren further discloses receiving, from the UE, a measurement report comprising measurement information that is based on a first measurement of the first DL-PRS by the UE (see steps 404-407 in figure 4, par 0260) and a second measurement of the second DL-PRS by the UE in accordance with the paired DL- PRS resource configuration (see steps 404-407 in figure 4, par 0260).
Regarding claims 18 and 48:
Ren further discloses determining a clock drift between the first and second measurements; and determining a position estimate of the UE based at least in part upon the clock drift (time difference of arrival interpreted to be a clock drift. Par 0257).
Regarding claims 19 and 49:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second measurements correspond to receive-transmit (Rx-Tx) time difference measurements based on timestamps derived on the same transmission reception point (TRP) and the same respective DL-PRS resources (par 0260).
Regarding claims 20 and 50:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are scheduled aperiodically, semi-periodically (par 0006), or periodically.
Regarding claims 21 and 51:
Ren further discloses wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are scheduled periodically (par 0273, 0297).
Regarding claims 22 and 52:
Ren further discloses wherein the measurement information is associated with two or more periodic instances of the first DL-PRS and two or more corresponding instances of the second DL-PRS (par 0265).
Regarding claims 26 and 56:
Ren further discloses wherein the paired DL-PRS resource configuration includes a first DL-PRS resource set with a given periodicity for the first DL-PRS, and a second DL-PRS resource set with the given periodicity for the second DL-PRS (par 0256, 0259, 0265).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 12, 15, 23, 25, 42, 45, 53 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of LI et al. (US 20230117493) (hereinafter Li).
Regarding claims 12, 23, 42 and 53:
Ren discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are associated with a positioning measurement procedure that further includes an uplink sounding reference signal for positioning (UL-SRS-P) transmitted by the UE.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the first and second DL-PRSs are associated with a positioning measurement procedure that further includes an uplink sounding reference signal for positioning (UL-SRS-P) transmitted by the UE (in step 51 of figures 5-6, Li shows DL-PRSs are associated with a positioning measurement procedure that further includes an uplink sounding reference signal for positioning UL-SRS. Par 0079, 0082-0083).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use PRS and SRS signals as taught by Li to modify the system and method of Ren in order to provide positioning measurement for the system (par 0082) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Regarding claims 15, 25, 45, and 55:
Ren discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the first DL-PRS precedes the UL-SRS-P, and wherein the second DL-PRS follows the UL-SRS-P.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the first DL-PRS precedes the UL-SRS-P, and wherein the second DL-PRS follows the UL-SRS-P (see step 51 is figures 5-6, par 0079, 0082-0083).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use PRS and SRS signals as taught by Li to modify the system and method of Ren in order to provide positioning measurement for the system (par 0082) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 4-8, 13-14, 24, 27-30, 34-38, 43-44, 54, and 57-60 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, Ren does not teach or suggest wherein the paired DL-PRS resource configuration includes a first DL-PRS resource set for the first DL-PRS, and a second DL-PRS resource set for the second DL- PRS that is configured as a duplicate of the first DL-PRS resource set, and wherein the time offset is between corresponding DL-PRS resources associated with the first DL-PRS resource set and the second DL-PRS resource set.
The prior art of record, Ren also does not teach or suggest wherein the paired DL-PRS resource configuration configures the first and second DL-PRSs as first and second repetitions of the same DL- PRS resource in a DL-PRS resource set with the time offset is between the first and second repetitions.
The prior art of record, Ren also does not teach or suggest wherein the paired DL-PRS resource configuration configures the first and second DL-PRSs as first and second repetition groups, respectively, of the same DL-PRS resource in a DL-PRS resource set with the time offset is between the first and second repetition groups.
The prior art of record, Ren also does not teach or suggest wherein the positioning measurement procedure is asymmetric such that a first time differential between the UL-SRS-P and the first DL- PRS is different than a second time differential between the UL-SRS-P and the second DL-PRS.
Conclusion
14. 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.
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whose telephone number is (571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/KABIR A TIMORY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631