DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claims 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are noted to use the term “means” as seen in: “means for obtaining an assertion…,” “means for obtaining first indications…,” “means for obtaining second indications…,” “means for correlating the first indications and the second indications…,” and “means for performing an action…” in Claim 15. “Means for performing the action…” in Claim 16. “Means for storing…” in Claim 17. “Means for determining…” in Claim 19. “Means for comparing…” in Claim 20. Broadest reasonable interpretation as seen in the specification interprets these terms as at least one processor, possibly in combination with at least one memory, possibly in combination with at least on transceiver.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7-9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pitt et al. (US 9344993).
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 47-49 “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 performing an action at the apparatus in response to the correlating (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”).
Regarding Claim 2, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 1, where Pitt further teaches, performing the action in response to the correlating indicating that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within a threshold distance of the first location within a threshold time of the first time performing the action in response to the correlating indicating that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within a threshold distance of the first location within a 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 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 perform an action in response to correlation of 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”).
Regarding Claim 9, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 8, where Pitt further teaches, the at least one processor is configured to perform the action in response to the correlation of the first indications and the second indications indicating that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within a threshold distance of the first location within a 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 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 an 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 performing an action in response to correlation of 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”).
Regarding Claim 16, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 15, where Pitt further teaches, the means for performing the action comprise means for performing the action in response to the correlation of the first indications and the second indications indicating that the first mobile device is greater than fifty percent likely to have been within a threshold distance of the first location within a 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”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 3, 10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitt et al. (US 9344993) in view of Wilkinson et al. (US 2019/0098013).
Regarding Claim 3, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 2, but does not teach, performing the action comprises storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the threshold time of the first time.
Wilkinson teaches performing the action comprises storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the 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 10, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 9, but does not teach, performing the action comprises storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the threshold time of the first time.
Wilkinson teaches performing the action comprises storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the 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 17, Pitt teaches the invention of Claim 16, but does not teach, the means for performing the action comprise means for storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the threshold time of the first time.
Wilkinson teaches , the means for performing the action comprise means for storing, in a blockchain ledger, a location verification indication indicating that the first mobile device was at least within the threshold distance of the first location at least within the 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.
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitt et al. (US 9344993) in view of Dou et al. (US 2023/0254664)
Regarding Claim 4, Pitt 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.
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 Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 5, Pitt in 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" and Par. [0122] “Step 530: The first network element determines at least one second terminal device based on the movement analysis results respectively corresponding to the plurality of terminal devices. A movement track of the second terminal device overlaps the movement track of the first terminal device, a movement manner of the second terminal device is the same as the movement manner of the first terminal device on an overlapping movement track, and there is a same preset event in a preset event experienced by the second terminal device and the preset event experienced by the first terminal device on the overlapping movement track”).
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 comparison of indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Pitt’s location verifier to better identify locations and to prevent misidentifying locations.
Regarding Claim 11, Pitt 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; (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 Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 12, Pitt in 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" and Par. [0122] “Step 530: The first network element determines at least one second terminal device based on the movement analysis results respectively corresponding to the plurality of terminal devices. A movement track of the second terminal device overlaps the movement track of the first terminal device, a movement manner of the second terminal device is the same as the movement manner of the first terminal device on an overlapping movement track, and there is a same preset event in a preset event experienced by the second terminal device and the preset event experienced by the first terminal device on the overlapping movement track”).
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 comparison of indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Pitt’s location verifier to better identify locations and to prevent misidentifying locations.
Regarding Claim 18, Pitt 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; (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 Pitt’s location verifier to quickly and accurately locate a mobile device.
Regarding Claim 19, Pitt in view of Dou teaches the invention of Claim 18, further teaching 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" and Par. [0122] “Step 530: The first network element determines at least one second terminal device based on the movement analysis results respectively corresponding to the plurality of terminal devices. A movement track of the second terminal device overlaps the movement track of the first terminal device, a movement manner of the second terminal device is the same as the movement manner of the first terminal device on an overlapping movement track, and there is a same preset event in a preset event experienced by the second terminal device and the preset event experienced by the first terminal device on the overlapping movement track”).
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 comparison of indications of serving cells and neighbor cells with Pitt’s location verifier to better identify locations and to prevent misidentifying locations.
Claims 6, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pitt et al. (US 9344993) in view of Alles et al. (US 10085230).
Regarding Claim 6, Pitt 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.
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 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 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.
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 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 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.
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 Pitt’s location verifier to improve location capabilities of a communications system in an environment with a higher usage of mobile devices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH NGHIA DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-5607. 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 5712727904. 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
/MARGARET G WEBB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641