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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claims recite “identifying, by the LMF, the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point;” however such action is not recited in the instant specification nor is a method with such step present.
Looking at the PGPub, [0029] provides for a benefit for transferring a group of UE’s in synch:
“This invention includes architectural modifications to eLCS (enhanced Localization Services) in 5G-NR, where a group UEs may be transferred to UWB in-sync, to undergo finer resolution ranging through UWB. Transferring a group UE's in synch provides many benefits, as detailed below. The invention covers the aspects of initial synchronization, tracking UE's through 5G-NR, decisions on grouping and the actual UE transfer mechanism orchestrated by the LMF (Location Management Function) of 5G-NR. The 5G-NR Localization Service may recognize the UWB capability of the UE and the LMF may decide when to use this capability, based on the UE location and the availability of other UEs with similar capability near the same location, to be transferred to UWB as a group.”
[0032] mentions that the invention is based on getting the UWB anchor (access point) synchronized to over-the-air synchronization of 5G-NR gNB, but fails to mention any selecting nor means for such:
“The invention is based on getting the UWB anchor (access point) synchronized to the over-the-air synchronisation of 5G-NR gNB and the gNB transferring a group of UE's who are in sync to UWB. This transfer could mean simply to use the UWB capability in the UE/device to conduct localization. The overall control of the eLCS procedure may still be maintained by 5G-NR.”
[0042] mentions time synchronization:
“In one example, the method comprises time synchronisation, by the UWB anchor, with the network, for example with a gNB clock thereof through off the air alignment to 5G-NR PSS and/or SSS.”
[0112] provides for a statement that “The UWB anchor is also required to achieve time synchronisation to this over the air signal. For this purpose, the UWB anchor may have to be equipped with a 5G-NR chip capable of reading this PSS and SSS and also a clock signal running at the (or in multiples of) the sampling clock rate for this 5G-NR system.” However fails to provide for selecting:
“In the FiRa solution, BLE based initial synchronisation was chosen because the UWB based synchronisation may be energy hungry. 5G-NR based time synchronisation may be based on broadcast PSS (Primary Synchronisation Signal) and SSS (Secondary Synchronisation Signal) and may be scaled to many UEs seamlessly. The UWB anchor is also required to achieve time synchronisation to this over the air signal. For this purpose, the UWB anchor may have to be equipped with a 5G-NR chip capable of reading this PSS and SSS and also a clock signal running at the (or in multiples of) the sampling clock rate for this 5G-NR system.”
[0113] provides for an embodiment wherein the UWB anchor is in time synch with a gNB but fails to mention the selection process / step:
“One requirement for this solution may be that the UEs at the border of the high accuracy zone and the UWB anchor itself may have a single dominant gNB (w.r.t. radio signal strength). The UEs at the boundary may all be connected to this gNB for localization. They may acquire the time synchronisation from this gNB. If the UWB anchor also acquires time synchronisation from this gNB through the PSS and SSS, the timing differences from the UWB anchor and the individual UEs may be a few nano seconds (ns), corresponding to distances of a few metres. This may be ideal for the execution of the staggered simultaneous device ranging, as detailed in section B below.”
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without means for the UWB anchor to achieve time synchronization and/or the UWB anchor itself to be equipped with a 5G-NR chip capable of reading the PSS and SSS and also a clock signal running at the sampling clock rate for the 5G-NR system, as recited in [0112], which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976).
Looking at the PgPub [0112]: “In the FiRa solution, BLE based initial synchronisation was chosen because the UWB based synchronisation may be energy hungry. 5G-NR based time synchronisation may be based on broadcast PSS (Primary Synchronisation Signal) and SSS (Secondary Synchronisation Signal) and may be scaled to many UEs seamlessly. The UWB anchor is also required to achieve time synchronisation to this over the air signal. For this purpose, the UWB anchor may have to be equipped with a 5G-NR chip capable of reading this PSS and SSS and also a clock signal running at the (or in multiples of) the sampling clock rate for this 5G-NR system.”
Claims 1 and 11 recite “identify the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point” acknowledging the importance of the synchronization yet leaves out the requirement (above) for the invention to work.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “identifying, by the LMF, the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point;” however “the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point” lacks an antecedent basis as there is no mention of any access point being synchronized to any access point. Further there is nothing claimed to determine which, if any, anchors are synchronized to the access point so it is not clear how the LMF would be privy to such and if the identification is dependent on such or not. Finally, the recitation implies a singularity not otherwise supported.
Claim 1 further recites “selecting, by the LMF, first user equipments (UEs), forming a first group for localizing, among a plurality of UEs in the cell;” however the term “user equipments” is ambiguous. The instant specification seems to randomly use each of “equipment” and equipments” as either singular or plural with no rhyme or reason. Therefore the use of “first user equipments (UEs)” and “among a plurality of UEs” is confusing. If “first user equipments (UEs)” is plural, then it should be stated since later “plurality of UEs” is used.
Claim 1 further recites “the first UEs among the plurality of UEs” and suffers with the same singular / plural issues as above.
Claim 2 recites “second UEs” and “among the plurality of UEs” and suffers equally.
Claims 3-6, 8-9 each further recite “first UEs” and suffer equally.
Apparatus Claims 11-20 correspond to method claims 1-10 such that claims 11-16 and 18-19 suffers with the same singular / plural issues as above.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the LMF performing the method of managing, identifying, selecting, and localizing must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 12, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry et al. (2024/0045046) hereinafter “Henry ‘046” and Liu et al. (10405366) hereinafter “Liu”.
As to claim 1, (Currently Amended) Henry ‘046 discloses A method performed by a location management function (LMF) in a wireless communication system (location server (190)), the method comprising:
managing, by the LMF, interworking with an ultra wideband (UWB) anchor located in a cell of an access point in the wireless communication system ([0039]: “The location server 190 includes hardware, software, and/or logic that are configured to manage location-related transmissions involving the radio devices 105, peripheral UWB anchor device 115, standalone UWB anchor device 120, and/or mobile devices 140 to initiate and complete client ranging procedures within the geographic area 101…”);
identifying, by the LMF, the UWB anchor [[synchronized to the access point]] ([0039]: “… by assigning and/or instructing one or more of the radio devices 105, peripheral UWB anchor device 115, and/or standalone UWB anchor device 120 to complete client ranging procedures with respect to one or more of the mobile devices 140”);
selecting, by the LMF, first user equipments (UEs), forming a first group for localizing, among a plurality of UEs in the cell ([0040]-[0041], [0069]-[0070], [0077],[0088], [0109], [0151] etc. evidence that at least one UE among plural has been selected for localizing thereby forming a group as indicated by the group index); and
localizing, via the UWB anchor by the LMF, the first UEs among the plurality of UEs ([0103], [0152]: “… the method may further include providing location information for the mobile device as a result of the UWB ranging”).
In an analogous art, Liu discloses wherein it was known to be advantageous to identifying, by the LMF, the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point (col 15 lines 8-32: “… the system may designate a hierarchy of Aps. In the hierarchal approach, the system may designate a primary AP to include additional equipment to have a range greater than that of a basic AP. The primary AP may be included in a set of more complex and costly anchor Aps that may have a built-in cellular modem to build a first layer of synchronization… The more cost effective client Aps covered by these anchor Aps are synchronized to these anchor Aps…”). Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the identifying step of Henry ‘046 to identify the UWB anchor synchronized to the access point as taught by Liu for the purpose of increasing network efficiencies (col 15 lines 56-62)
As to claim 2. (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, Henry ‘046 further provides for further comprising:
identifying, by the LMF, second UEs, forming a second group for localizing, among the plurality of UEs; and
localizing, via the access point by the LMF, the second UEs among the plurality of UEs. See [0039] –[0040].
As to claim 6, (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, Henry ‘046 further discloses wherein localizing, via the UWB anchor, the first subset of UEs comprises staggered simultaneous ranging of the first UEs. See [0070]-[0072].
In addition applicant admits [0067] of the instant specification wherein localising, via the UWB anchor, the first subset of UEs comprises staggered simultaneous ranging of the selected subset of UEs was proposed by Decawave [5] to increase the time resource usage efficiency and is thus admitted prior art. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art wherein localising, via the UWB anchor, the first subset of UEs comprises staggered simultaneous ranging of the selected subset of UEs to increase the time resource usage efficiency as proposed by Decawave.
As to claim 8, (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, Henry ‘046 further discloses wherein the LMF transfers the first UEs for localizing, via the UWB anchor, based on at least one of a predetermined location or a predetermined time. See [0017]-[0018], [0040], etc..
Claims 11, 12, 16, 18 correspond to claims 1, 2, 6, and 8 respectively wherein a transceiver and processor are considered inherent.
Claim(s) 3-5 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry ‘046 and Liu as applied to claims 1/11 above, and further in view of Henry et al. (2022/0070816) hereinafter “Henry ‘816”.
As to claim 3. (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Henry ‘816 further provides for wherein selecting, by the LMF, the first subset of UEs is performed based, at least in part, on at least one of mutual proximity or mutual adjacency thereof. See [0065]-[0066] & [0069]. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the selecting, by the LMF, wherein the first subset of UEs is performed based, at least in part, on at least one of mutual proximity or mutual adjacency thereof as taught by Henry ‘816 for the purpose of using the strongest and/or most accurate candidates.
As to claim 4, (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Henry ‘816 further provides for wherein the LMF transfers the first subset of UEs for localizing, via the UWB anchor, using a single broadcast message or multiple unicast messages. See [0070]-[0071]. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify wherein the LMF transfers the first subset of UEs for localizing, via the UWB anchor, using a single broadcast message or multiple unicast messages for reliability.
As to claim 5, (Currently Amended) The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu provides for the method of claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Henry ‘816 further provides for wherein the LMF requests the first UEs, to respectively activate UWB localizing or via a UWB interworking-function of the LMF. See [0070]-[0071]. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify wherein the LMF requests the first UEs, to respectively activate UWB localizing or via a UWB interworking-function of the LMF to utilize its function.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry ‘046 and Liu as applied to claims 1/11 above, and further in view of Bao et al (2022/0248366) hereinafter “Bao”.
The combination of Henry ‘046 and Liu discloses the method/apparatus according to claim 1/11, is silent to yet in an analogous art Bao discloses [0062] wherein interworking with the UWB anchor is performed via a Non-3GPP Interworking Function, N3IWF, a Trusted Non-3GPP Gateway Function, TNGF, or an interworking function for UWB. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art wherein interworking with the UWB anchor is performed in a Non-3GPP Interworking Function, N3IWF, a Trusted Non-3GPP Gateway Function, TNGF, or an interworking function for UWB in order to support all communication technologies.
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry ‘046 and Liu as applied to claim 1/11 above, and further in view of Martin et al. (EP3680687) hereinafter “Martin”.
The combination of Henry and Takeda discloses the method/apparatus of claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Martin discloses [0026], [0045], [0050], etc. comprising controlling access at a barrier for the first UEs. Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to controlling access at a barrier using the localising of the first UEs as taught by Martin for the purpose of added security.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry ‘046 and Liu as applied to claim 1/11 above, and further in view of Ren et al. (2020/0169947) hereinafter “Ren”.
The combination of Henry and Takeda discloses the method/apparatus according to claim 1/11, is silent to yet in an analogous art Ren discloses [0003] time synchronization, by the UWB anchor, with the network, wherein time synchronization between the UWB anchor, and the access point is performed based on a clock of the access point through an air alignment to at least one of 5G-NR primary synchronization signal (PSS) or secondary synchronization signal (SSS). Before the effective filing date of the instant invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform time synchronization, wherein time synchronization between the UWB anchor, and the access point is performed based on a clock of the access point through an air alignment to at least one of 5G-NR primary synchronization signal (PSS) or secondary synchronization signal (SSS) for the purpose of improving performance.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESTER KINCAID whose telephone number is (571)272-7922. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7-5.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
LESTER G. KINCAID
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2649
/LESTER G KINCAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights