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
This action is in response to the amendment filed May 26, 2026 (5/26/2026).
Currently, Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 remain pending.
Claims 3, 10, and 17 are canceled.
No new claims were added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Pg. 9, filed May 26, 2026 (5/26/2026), with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 2, 7-9, and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Pitt et al. (.
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks Pg. 9-10, filed regarding Pitt in view of Wilkinson have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Wilkinson is silent as to any determining of whether an assertion of a mobile device is trustworthy based on a correlating operation,” but respectfully, the Examiner disagrees.
Wilkinson does indeed teach “performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time.”
Wilkinson discloses in Par. [0040], “For example, in response to receiving the event associated with the initiation of transfer of the one or more physical objects, control engine 320 can generate a hash key embedded with a timestamp indicating a time the event was received. The node 325 can generate a block in the transfer blockchain database 330. The block can store the information associated with the event along with the generated hash key embedded with the timestamp. The object transfer application 132 can transmit an alert to the central computing system 300 in response to reaching the destination location. The alert can include a time of arrival at the destination location. The control engine 320 can verify the transfer of the one or more physical objects in response to determining the duration between the time of arrival at the destination location and the timestamp embedded in the hash is within a specified time period. As noted above, in response to verifying the transfer of the one or more physical objects, the node 335 can generate a subsequent block including transaction records of transferring the one or more physical objects to the third party”
The control engine verifying the transfer based on the alert is read on determining the trustworthiness while the correlating operation is read on determining the duration between the time of arrival and the timestamp of the generated hash (the first and second times) is within a specified time period. Furthermore, the threshold distance is read on as reaching the destination location.
Examiner notes that Par. [0113] of the instant specification discloses “(based on the trustworthiness score indicating that the location of the UE 711 is trustworthy, e.g., above a threshold such as 50% (or 60%, or 70%, or 80%, or 90%) likely to be accurate for the time corresponding to the asserted location)” and verifying the transfer location based on the arrival at the destination location would be equate to a 100% “trustworthiness score” and being within a “threshold distance.”
This action is made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim 1 (and similar claims 8 and 15) states “performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time.” This limitation, however, is impossible. The storing of a “location verification indication” must require the verification of the location to happen first. There is also no mention in the specification as to how storage of the verification indication can actually occur while the verification is happening. The closest mentioning of this is found in Par. [0164] “Also, a number of operations may be undertaken before, during, or after the above elements are considered” but it is not explained further and leaves the claim unclear as to what constitute “a number of operations”.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7-9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitt et al. (.
Regarding Claim 1, Pitt teaches a mobile device location assertion verification method comprising: obtaining, at an apparatus, an assertion of a first mobile device being at a first location at a first time; (Col. 14, Lines 6-7 “The target identifier 210 can receive a location report from a target device”),
obtaining, at the apparatus, first indications of a radio frequency environment corresponding to the first mobile device, the first location, and the first time; (Col. 14, Lines 9-13 “The location report can include, for example, the location of the target device at a given instance of time, as well as a unique identifier (e.g., an IP address, a MAC address, an MSID, a Bluetooth identifier, etc.) for the target device” and Col. 14, Lines 30-31 “In such a situation, the target identifier 210 can determine an RF fingerprint for the target device”),
obtaining, at the apparatus, second indications of a second radio frequency environment corresponding to a second mobile device, a second location, and a second time; (Col. 5, Lines 41-44 “Additionally or alternatively, the interrogation of each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report request. In such a situation, the response to the interrogation provided from each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report that includes data characterizing a location of a respective reference device 16”),
correlating, at the apparatus, the first indications and the second indications; (Col. 6, Lines 47-53 “Additionally, the location verifier 4 compare the RF fingerprint of the target device 4 with the RF fingerprint of each of the K number of reference devices 16. Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”), and
determining, at the apparatus, whether the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the first and the second indications (Col. 6, Lines 50-53 “Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”).
Pitt however, does not teach performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time.
In the same field of endeavor, Wilkinson teaches performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time (Par. [0040] “The control engine 320 can verify the transfer of the one or more physical objects in response to determining the duration between the time of arrival at the destination location and the timestamp embedded in the hash is within a specified time period. As noted above, in response to verifying the transfer of the one or more physical objects, the node 335 can generate a subsequent block including transaction records of transferring the one or more physical objects to the third party”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location with Pitt’s location verifier to better secure the recording of locations from tampering and unauthorized revision.
Regarding Claim 2, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 1, where Pitt further teaches determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the of the first indications and the second indications includes determining that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within the threshold distance of the first location with the threshold time of the first time (Col. 6, Lines 47-49 “The verification scorer 218 can be configured such that if the verification scorer 218 finds the peer-to-peer device identifier included in the target device's location report in all of the interrogated lists of peer-to-peer device identifiers and some of the devices near the target are not associated with the target then the verification scorer 218 can set the confidence of the location verification to VERY HIGH” and Col. 11, Lines 54-62 “The variable responseListLimit can represents a maximum number of mobile devices needed to be in the returned list of mobile devices, the reference latitude and longitude values can be set to a center of the search area (for the purposes of simplification of explanation, this location stipulated as the location contained within the target device's location report), the reference distance can be a value computed as 50% of the maximum range associated with a chosen peer-to-peer technology”).
Regarding Claim 7, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 1, where Pitt further teaches, obtaining the first indications comprises receiving the first indications at the apparatus from the first mobile device, the method further comprising: determining a latitude and longitude of the first mobile device based on at least some of the first indications; (Col. 3, Lines 41-44 “The location report can include, for example, data that characterizes a geographic location (e.g., latitude and longitudinal coordinates) of the target device 4”),
determining a confidence of the latitude and longitude; (Col. 6, Lines 28-34 “Additionally, in such a situation, the location verifier 8 can determine that the location identified in the location report of the target device 4 may not be trustworthy. This likelihood (of unreliability) can be further increased if the geographic location identified in the location report from the associated device 14 matches the location identified in the location report for the target device 4”),
and determining a trustworthiness score based on the correlating, the trustworthiness score being indicative of a trustworthiness of the latitude, the longitude, and the confidence of the latitude and longitude (Col. 6, Lines 34-37 “Thus, the location verifier 8 can generate a confidence value that characterizes a degree of trustworthiness of the location characterized in the location report provided from the target device 4”).
Regarding Claim 8, Pitt teaches an apparatus comprising: at least one transceiver; (Col. 2, Lines 1-2 “The location verifier can be configured to receive a location report of a target mobile device,”), at least one memory; (Col. 13, Lines 44-45, Fig. 6 “The location verifier 200 can include a memory 202 that can store machine readable instructions”),
and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one transceiver and the at least one memory and configured to: (Col. 13, Lines 50-52, Fig. 6 “The location verifier 200 can also include a processing unit 204 to access the memory 202 and execute the machine-readable instructions”),
obtain an assertion of a first mobile device being at a first location at a first time; (Col. 14, Lines 6-7 “The target identifier 210 can receive a location report from a target device”),
obtain first indications of a radio frequency environment corresponding to the first mobile device, the first location, and the first time; (Col. 14, Lines 9-13 “The location report can include, for example, the location of the target device at a given instance of time, as well as a unique identifier (e.g., an IP address, a MAC address, an MSID, a Bluetooth identifier, etc.) for the target device”),
obtain second indications of a second radio frequency environment corresponding to a second mobile device, a second location, and a second time; (Col. 5, Lines 41-44 “Additionally or alternatively, the interrogation of each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report request. In such a situation, the response to the interrogation provided from each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report that includes data characterizing a location of a respective reference device 16”),
correlate the first indications and the second indications; (Col. 6, Lines 47-49 “Additionally, the location verifier 4 compare the RF fingerprint of the target device 4 with the RF fingerprint of each of the K number of reference devices 16. Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”), and
determine, whether the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the first and the second indications (Col. 6, Lines 50-53 “Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”).
Pitt however, does not teach perform, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time.
In the same field of endeavor, Wilkinson teaches perform, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time (Par. [0040] “The control engine 320 can verify the transfer of the one or more physical objects in response to determining the duration between the time of arrival at the destination location and the timestamp embedded in the hash is within a specified time period. As noted above, in response to verifying the transfer of the one or more physical objects, the node 335 can generate a subsequent block including transaction records of transferring the one or more physical objects to the third party”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location with Pitt’s location verifier to better secure the recording of locations from tampering and unauthorized revision.
Regarding Claim 9, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 8, where Pitt further teaches determine that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the of the first indications and the second indications includes determining that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within the threshold distance of the first location with the threshold time of the first time (Col. 6, Lines 47-49 “The verification scorer 218 can be configured such that if the verification scorer 218 finds the peer-to-peer device identifier included in the target device's location report in all of the interrogated lists of peer-to-peer device identifiers and some of the devices near the target are not associated with the target then the verification scorer 218 can set the confidence of the location verification to VERY HIGH” and Col. 11, Lines 54-62 “The variable responseListLimit can represents a maximum number of mobile devices needed to be in the returned list of mobile devices, the reference latitude and longitude values can be set to a center of the search area (for the purposes of simplification of explanation, this location stipulated as the location contained within the target device's location report), the reference distance can be a value computed as 50% of the maximum range associated with a chosen peer-to-peer technology”).
Regarding Claim 14, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 8, where Pitt further teaches, the at least one processor is configured to receive, via the at least one transceiver, the first indications from the first mobile device, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine a latitude and longitude of the first mobile device based on at least some of the first indications; (Col. 3, Lines 41-44 “The location report can include, for example, data that characterizes a geographic location (e.g., latitude and longitudinal coordinates) of the target device 4”),
determine a confidence of the latitude and longitude; (Col. 6, Lines 28-34 “Additionally, in such a situation, the location verifier 8 can determine that the location identified in the location report of the target device 4 may not be trustworthy. This likelihood (of unreliability) can be further increased if the geographic location identified in the location report from the associated device 14 matches the location identified in the location report for the target device 4”),
and determine a trustworthiness score based on correlation of the first indications and the second indications, the trustworthiness score being indicative of a trustworthiness of the latitude, the longitude, and the confidence of the latitude and longitude (Col. 6, Lines 34-37 “Thus, the location verifier 8 can generate a confidence value that characterizes a degree of trustworthiness of the location characterized in the location report provided from the target device 4”).
Regarding Claim 15, Pitt teaches apparatus comprising: means for obtaining an assertion of a first mobile device being at a first location at a first time; (Col. 14, Lines 6-7 “The target identifier 210 can receive a location report from a target device”),
means for obtaining first indications of a radio frequency environment corresponding to the first mobile device, the first location, and the first time; (Col. 14, Lines 9-13 “The location report can include, for example, the location of the target device at a given instance of time, as well as a unique identifier (e.g., an IP address, a MAC address, an MSID, a Bluetooth identifier, etc.) for the target device”),
means for obtaining second indications of a second radio frequency environment corresponding to a second mobile device, a second location, and a second time; (Col. 5, Lines 41-44 “Additionally or alternatively, the interrogation of each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report request. In such a situation, the response to the interrogation provided from each of the K number of reference devices 16 can include a location report that includes data characterizing a location of a respective reference device 16”),
means for correlating the first indications and the second indications; (Col. 6, Lines 47-49 “Additionally, the location verifier 4 compare the RF fingerprint of the target device 4 with the RF fingerprint of each of the K number of reference devices 16. Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”), and
means for determining, at the apparatus, whether the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the first and the second indications (Col. 6, Lines 50-53 “Based on the similarities and differences of the RF fingerprints, the location verifier 4 can increase or decrease the confidence that the location report of the target device 4 is trustworthy”).
Pitt however, does not teach performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time.
In the same field of endeavor, Wilkinson teaches performing, when it is determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy, an action at the apparatus including storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within a threshold distance of the first location at least within a threshold time of the first time (Par. [0040] “The control engine 320 can verify the transfer of the one or more physical objects in response to determining the duration between the time of arrival at the destination location and the timestamp embedded in the hash is within a specified time period. As noted above, in response to verifying the transfer of the one or more physical objects, the node 335 can generate a subsequent block including transaction records of transferring the one or more physical objects to the third party”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location with Pitt’s location verifier to better secure the recording of locations from tampering and unauthorized revision.
Regarding Claim 16, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 15, where Pitt further teaches the means for determining that the assertion of the first mobile device is trustworthy based on the correlating of the of the first indications and the second indications includes determining that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within the threshold distance of the first location with the threshold time of the first time (Col. 6, Lines 47-49 “The verification scorer 218 can be configured such that if the verification scorer 218 finds the peer-to-peer device identifier included in the target device's location report in all of the interrogated lists of peer-to-peer device identifiers and some of the devices near the target are not associated with the target then the verification scorer 218 can set the confidence of the location verification to VERY HIGH” and Col. 11, Lines 54-62 “The variable responseListLimit can represents a maximum number of mobile devices needed to be in the returned list of mobile devices, the reference latitude and longitude values can be set to a center of the search area (for the purposes of simplification of explanation, this location stipulated as the location contained within the target device's location report), the reference distance can be a value computed as 50% of the maximum range associated with a chosen peer-to-peer technology”).
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitt et al. ( in view of Dou et al. (US 2023/0254664).
Regarding Claim 4, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 1, but does not teach the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time.
In the same field of endeavor, Dou teaches the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; (Fig. 5, Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices,” Par. [0113] “The data of the plurality of terminal devices includes data of a first terminal device. The data of the first terminal device includes at least one of application data of the first terminal device, location information of the first terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the first terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”),
and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time (Fig. 5, Par. [0027] “In a possible design, the preset model is obtained based on a plurality of pieces of historical data. A j.sup.th piece of historical data corresponds to a j.sup.th terminal device, and j is a positive integer. The j.sup.th piece of historical data includes at least one of application data of the j.sup.th terminal device, location information of the j.sup.th terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located,” Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 5, Pitt in view of Wilkinson in further view of Dou teaches the invention of Claim 4, further teaching the correlating comprises determining whether both the first indications and the second indications include a common globally-unique cell identifier (Par. [0086] "For example, the second data may further include an RSRP of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 1, an SINR of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 2, an RSRP of the cell 2, an SINR of the cell 2, an RSRP of a cell 3, RSRQ of the cell 3, an RSRP of a cell 4, and RSRQ of the cell 4. The cell 3 and the cell 4 are neighboring cells of the cell 1. The range of the UE in the serving cell can be narrowed by using the foregoing data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 11, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 8, but does not teach the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time.
In the same field of endeavor, Dou teaches the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; (Fig. 5, Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices,” Par. [0113] “The data of the plurality of terminal devices includes data of a first terminal device. The data of the first terminal device includes at least one of application data of the first terminal device, location information of the first terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the first terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”),
and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time (Fig. 5, Par. [0027] “In a possible design, the preset model is obtained based on a plurality of pieces of historical data. A j.sup.th piece of historical data corresponds to a j.sup.th terminal device, and j is a positive integer. The j.sup.th piece of historical data includes at least one of application data of the j.sup.th terminal device, location information of the j.sup.th terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located,” Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 12, Pitt in view of Wilkinson in further view of Dou teaches the invention of Claim 11, further teaching the at least one processor is configured to determine whether both the first indications and the second indications include a common globally-unique cell identifier (Par. [0086] "For example, the second data may further include an RSRP of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 1, an SINR of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 2, an RSRP of the cell 2, an SINR of the cell 2, an RSRP of a cell 3, RSRQ of the cell 3, an RSRP of a cell 4, and RSRQ of the cell 4. The cell 3 and the cell 4 are neighboring cells of the cell 1. The range of the UE in the serving cell can be narrowed by using the foregoing data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 18, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 15, but does not teach the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time.
In the same field of endeavor, Dou teaches the first indications include a first serving cell identifier of a first serving cell of the first mobile device at the first time, and a first neighbor cell identifier of a first neighbor cell corresponding to the first mobile device at the first time; (Fig. 5, Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices,” Par. [0113] “The data of the plurality of terminal devices includes data of a first terminal device. The data of the first terminal device includes at least one of application data of the first terminal device, location information of the first terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the first terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”),
and the second indications include a second serving cell identifier of a second serving cell of the second mobile device at the second time, and a second neighbor cell identifier of a second neighbor cell corresponding to the second mobile device at the second time (Fig. 5, Par. [0027] “In a possible design, the preset model is obtained based on a plurality of pieces of historical data. A j.sup.th piece of historical data corresponds to a j.sup.th terminal device, and j is a positive integer. The j.sup.th piece of historical data includes at least one of application data of the j.sup.th terminal device, location information of the j.sup.th terminal device, an identifier of a serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located, an identifier of a neighboring cell of the serving cell in which the j.sup.th terminal device is located,” Par. [0112] “Step 500: A first network element obtains data of a plurality of terminal devices” and Par. [0116] “The second information may further include filtering information, which is used to request a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result corresponding to the filtering information, or a terminal device corresponding to a movement analysis result that meets the filtering information. For example, the second information may include a time filtering condition (for example, a time period) or a location filtering condition (for example, a specific geographic area)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 19, Pitt in view of Wilkinson in further view of Dou teaches the invention of Claim 18, where Dou further teaches the means for correlating comprise means for determining whether both the first indications and the second indications include a common globally-unique cell identifier (Par. [0086] "For example, the second data may further include an RSRP of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 1, an SINR of the cell 1, RSRQ of the cell 2, an RSRP of the cell 2, an SINR of the cell 2, an RSRP of a cell 3, RSRQ of the cell 3, an RSRP of a cell 4, and RSRQ of the cell 4. The cell 3 and the cell 4 are neighboring cells of the cell 1. The range of the UE in the serving cell can be narrowed by using the foregoing data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Dou’s indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Claims 6, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [ Pitt et al. ( in view of Alles et al. (US 10085230).
Regarding Claim 6, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 1, but does not teach, the correlating comprises comparing a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source.
In the same field of endeavor, Alles teaches, the correlating comprises comparing a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source (Col. 9, Lines 37-51 "Measurement data from mobile devices in the set and from the target mobile device may be transmitted to a communications network entity at step 320. At step 330, a location of the target mobile device may then be determined as a function of both the transmitted measurement data from the set of mobile devices and the transmitted measurement data from the target mobile device. As noted above, exemplary common parameters may include a Wi-Fi access point, Bluetooth radio channel information, Wi-Fi signal information, RF signal parameters of signal transmissions from the mobile device, channel number information, channel frequency information, timeslot information, network timing information, range information, spreading code information, received signal strength indications, signal to noise ratios,").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Alles’s determination of a target mobile device location using signal to noise ratios from the target mobile device and mobile devices in a set with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to improve location capabilities of a communications system in an environment with a higher usage of mobile devices.
Regarding Claim 13, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 8, but does not teach, the at least one processor is configured to compare a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source.
In the same field of endeavor, Alles teaches, the at least one processor is configured to compare a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source (Col. 9, Lines 37-51 "Measurement data from mobile devices in the set and from the target mobile device may be transmitted to a communications network entity at step 320. At step 330, a location of the target mobile device may then be determined as a function of both the transmitted measurement data from the set of mobile devices and the transmitted measurement data from the target mobile device. As noted above, exemplary common parameters may include a Wi-Fi access point, Bluetooth radio channel information, Wi-Fi signal information, RF signal parameters of signal transmissions from the mobile device, channel number information, channel frequency information, timeslot information, network timing information, range information, spreading code information, received signal strength indications, signal to noise ratios,").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Alles’s determination of a target mobile device location using signal to noise ratios from the target mobile device and mobile devices in a set with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to improve location capabilities of a communications system in an environment with a higher usage of mobile devices.
Regarding Claim 20, Pitt in view of Wilkinson teaches the invention of Claim 15, but does not teach, the means for correlating comprise means for comparing a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source.
In the same field of endeavor, Alles teaches the means for correlating comprise means for comparing a first signal-to-noise ratio of the first indications to a second signal-to-noise ratio of the second indications, the first signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a first measurement of a first signal from a signal source, and the second signal-to-noise ratio corresponding to a second measurement of a second signal from the signal source (Col. 9, Lines 37-51 "Measurement data from mobile devices in the set and from the target mobile device may be transmitted to a communications network entity at step 320. At step 330, a location of the target mobile device may then be determined as a function of both the transmitted measurement data from the set of mobile devices and the transmitted measurement data from the target mobile device. As noted above, exemplary common parameters may include a Wi-Fi access point, Bluetooth radio channel information, Wi-Fi signal information, RF signal parameters of signal transmissions from the mobile device, channel number information, channel frequency information, timeslot information, network timing information, range information, spreading code information, received signal strength indications, signal to noise ratios,").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Alles’s determination of a target mobile device location using signal to noise ratios from the target mobile device and mobile devices in a set with Wilkinson’s blockchain storage of a verified destination location and Pitt’s location verifier to improve location capabilities of a communications system in an environment with a higher usage of mobile devices.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tedesco et al. (US 2022/0255928) discloses “As more and more nodes in a network corroborate the location of a device, a certain confidence threshold may be reached by the system. Once the confidence threshold is reached, the verification of the device location and timestamp may be added to a blockchain. In some instances, the actual device location and timestamp data may be added to the blockchain. In other instances, a verification statement that a device was in a location at a certain time may be stored on the blockchain, hiding the actual location and timestamp location from other nodes in the blockchain network” (Par. [0022]).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 JOSEPH NGHIA DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-7982. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 7:30AM-5PM.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/J.N.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights