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
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed on 11/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. A. Regarding claim 1 (similarly, claim 29), the Applicant argues that the combination of Bao and Gangakhedkar fails to teach or suggest the claimed limitations of:
“the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal.”
However, the Examiner maintains that the Gangakhedkaaro, which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal.”(= cooperative positioning (CP) response broadcast by anchor nodes on sidelink includes anchor node identity and absolute or relative positions, see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
B. Regarding claim 10 (similarly, claim 48), the Applicant argues that the combination of Bao and Gangakhedkar fails to teach or suggest the claimed limitations of:
“wherein the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal”
However, the Examiner maintains that the Gangakhedkaaro, which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“wherein the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal(= cooperative positioning (CP) response broadcast by anchor nodes on sidelink includes anchor node identity and absolute or relative positions, see [0052 and 0059]).
Therefore, the combination of Bao and Gangakhedkar is proper and the Office Action is being made FINAL as shown below.
C. The rejection of all the dependent claims, by virtue of their dependency from the independent claims, is also being made Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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, 4-5, 7-10, 13-14, 16-18, 29 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bao et al., (US 2022/0244344), (hereinafter, Zhang) in view of Gangakhedkar et al., (US 2019/0239181), (hereinafter, Gangakhedkar).
Regarding claims 1 and 29, Bao discloses a relative positioning method/terminal
(= joint positioning session, see [0095]), comprising:
transmitting, by a first terminal (= location server 120), a first relative positioning request message to a target device (= UE 105 and UE 106 respectively and the location server 120 perform a capability transfer; and location server 120 may send a request capabilities message to the UE 105 and 106; and in which the UE 105 and 106 may indicate capability for sidelink-assisted positioning, see [0096]);
receiving, by the first terminal, a first relative positioning response message transmitted by the target device (= UE1 105 transmits a positioning information report to the location server 120, see [0109-110]),
wherein the target device is a network side device or at least one second terminal (= UE 105 and 106 may indicate capability for sidelink-assisted positioning, see [0096]).
Bao explicitly fails to disclose the claimed limitations of:
“positioning authorization method” and “determining, by the first terminal, that relative positioning authorization has been completed” and the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal.”
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“positioning authorization method” and “determining, by the first terminal, that relative positioning authorization has been completed” (= target node transmitting a request for positioning support; and anchor nodes can choose whether or not to comply with that instruction, see [0052, 0054-55 and 0078-79]) and “the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal (= cooperative positioning (CP) response broadcast by anchor nodes on sidelink includes anchor node identity and absolute or relative positions, see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 4, as mentioned in claim 1, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization method, further comprising: transmitting a relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message to the second terminal, wherein the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message comprises identity information of a paired terminal which agrees to perform relative positioning.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, further comprising: transmitting a relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message to the second terminal, wherein the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message comprises identity information of a paired terminal which agrees to perform relative positioning (= cooperative positioning (CP) response broadcast by anchor nodes on sidelink includes anchor node identity and absolute or relative positions, see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 5, as mentioned in claim 1, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization method, wherein the first relative positioning request message comprises: identity information of the second terminal; or identity information of a base station to which the first terminal belongs.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein the first relative positioning request message comprises: identity information of the second terminal; or identity information of a base station to which the first terminal belongs (see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 7, as mentioned in claim 4, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein subsequent to transmitting the relative positioning pairing acknowledge message to the second terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving relative positioning capability information transmitted by the second terminal; selecting a relative positioning method for the paired terminal in accordance with the relative positioning capability information, and transmitting second information to the second terminal, the second information comprising the relative positioning method selected by the first terminal for the paired terminal.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein subsequent to transmitting the relative positioning pairing acknowledge message to the second terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving relative positioning capability information transmitted by the second terminal; selecting a relative positioning method for the paired terminal in accordance with the relative positioning capability information, and transmitting second information to the second terminal, the second information comprising the relative positioning method selected by the first terminal for the paired terminal (see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 8, as mentioned in claim 4, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein subsequent to transmitting the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message to the second terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: transmitting relative positioning capability information to the second terminal; and receiving third information transmitted by the second terminal, the third information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the second terminal for the paired terminal.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
wherein subsequent to transmitting the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message to the second terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: transmitting relative positioning capability information to the second terminal; and receiving third information transmitted by the second terminal, the third information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the second terminal for the paired terminal (see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 9, as mentioned in claim 7, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein the relative positioning capability information comprises at least one of: a reference signal frequency at which the relative positioning is supported; a bandwidth at which the relative positioning is supported; a duration for transmitting a positioning signal; a type of a transmitted signal; a carrier aggregation capability; a frequency hopping capability; a multi-antenna capability; a supported relative positioning method; a type of a received signal; or whether having a capability of calculating a relative position or not.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
wherein the relative positioning capability information comprises at least one of: a reference signal frequency at which the relative positioning is supported; a bandwidth at which the relative positioning is supported; a duration for transmitting a positioning signal; a type of a transmitted signal; a carrier aggregation capability; a frequency hopping capability; a multi-antenna capability; a supported relative positioning method; a type of a received signal; or whether having a capability of calculating a relative position or not (= CP response is broadcasted by anchor nodes on the sidelink, see [0055, 0078 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claims 10 and 48, Bao discloses a relative positioning method/target device (= joint positioning session, see [0095]), comprising:
receiving, by a target device, a first relative positioning request message transmitted by a first terminal (= UE 105 and UE 106 respectively and the location server 120 perform a capability transfer; and location server 120 may send a request capabilities message to the UE 105 and 106; and in which the UE 105 and 106 may indicate capability for sidelink-assisted positioning, see [0096]); and
transmitting, by the target device, a first relative positioning response message to the first terminal, wherein the target device is a network side device or at least one second terminal (= UE1 105 transmits a positioning information report to the location server 120, see [0109-110]).
Bao explicitly fails to disclose the claimed limitations of:
“positioning authorization method” and “enable the first terminal to determine that relative positioning authorization has been completed in accordance with the first relative positioning response message”. , the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“positioning authorization method” and “enable the first terminal to determine that relative positioning authorization has been completed in accordance with the first relative positioning response message” (= target node transmitting a request for positioning support; and anchor nodes can choose whether or not to comply with that instruction, see [0052, 0054-55 and 0078-79]) wherein the first relative positioning response message is used to indicate that the second terminal agrees to participate in a relative positioning service, and the first relative positioning response message comprises identity information of the second terminal (= cooperative positioning (CP) response broadcast by anchor nodes on sidelink includes anchor node identity and absolute or relative positions, see [0052 and 0059]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 13, as mentioned in claim 10, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein subsequent to transmitting, by the target device, the first relative positioning response message to the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving a relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message transmitted by the first terminal, and the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message comprises identity information of a paired terminal which agrees to perform relative positioning.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein subsequent to transmitting, by the target device, the first relative positioning response message to the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving a relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message transmitted by the first terminal, and the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message comprises identity information of a paired terminal which agrees to perform relative positioning (see [0055, 0077-78 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 14, as mentioned in claim 10, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein the first relative positioning request message comprises: identity information of the second terminal; or identity information of a base station to which the first terminal belongs.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein the first relative positioning request message comprises: identity information of the second terminal; or identity information of a base station to which the first terminal belongs (see [0055, 0077-78 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 16, as mentioned in claim 10, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization further comprising: determining, by the second terminal, whether to agree to participate in the relative positioning service in accordance with the relative positioning capability information.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, further comprising: determining, by the second terminal, whether to agree to participate in the relative positioning service in accordance with the relative positioning capability information(see [0055, 0077-78 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 17, as mentioned in claim 13, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein subsequent to receiving the relative positioning pairing acknowledge message transmitted by the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: transmitting relative positioning capability information to the first terminal; and receiving second information transmitted by the first terminal, the second information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the first terminal for the paired terminal.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein subsequent to receiving the relative positioning pairing acknowledge message transmitted by the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: transmitting relative positioning capability information to the first terminal; and receiving second information transmitted by the first terminal, the second information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the first terminal for the paired terminal (see [0055, 0077-78 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
Regarding claim 18, as mentioned in claim 13, Bao explicitly fails to disclose the relative positioning authorization wherein subsequent to receiving the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message transmitted by the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving relative positioning capability information transmitted by the first terminal; and transmitting third information to the first terminal, the third information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the second terminal for the paired terminal.
However, Gangakhedkar which is an analogous art equivalently discloses
the relative positioning authorization method, wherein subsequent to receiving the relative positioning pairing acknowledgement message transmitted by the first terminal, the relative positioning authorization method further comprises: receiving relative positioning capability information transmitted by the first terminal; and transmitting third information to the first terminal, the third information comprising a relative positioning method selected by the second terminal for the paired terminal (see [0055, 0077-78 and 0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Ganggakhedkar with Bao for the benefit of achieving a communication positioning system that includes dynamic selection of most appropriate anchor nodes at a time when targets nodes actually requires positioning support, which contributes to better position accuracy in communication system where the most appropriate anchor nodes for the target node may be continually changing.
CONCLUSION
4. 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of 33the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kwasi Karikari whose telephone number is
571-272-8566.The examiner can normally be reached on M-Sat (6am – 10pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Charles Appiah can be reached on 571-272-7904.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8566.
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).
/Kwasi Karikari/
Primary Examiner: Art Unit 2641.