Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Priority
This application claims provisional priority to U.S. Application 63/515,527, filed 7/25/2023.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 8, 13 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites “determine if the cellular communications network” on line 3. Examiner recommend changing the limitation to “determine if [[the]] cellular communications network”, or similar wording. Claims 8, 13 and 18 also recite the same phrase and are recommended amending accordingly.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/18/2026, with respect to restriction requirement have been fully considered and are persuasive. The restriction requirement has been withdrawn.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07€ and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 11-13 and 17-19 are rejected on the ground of provisional nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 2 and 8 of US Application No. 18/610,066. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 18/610,063
US Application No.
18/610,066
Interpretation/Differences
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant;
in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources:
selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and
in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value;
in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; and
in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as non-compliant; and
in response to identifying no compliant source:
selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources;
selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and
using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,066 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
US Application No. 18/610,066 does not explicitly teach selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value. However, US Application No. 18/610,066 teaches “selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources”. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art would arrive to the claim 1 of the instant application as it is an obvious design choice.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
9. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: select an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identify the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
17. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
18. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
8. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value; in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; and in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as non-compliant; and in response to identifying no compliant source: select a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; select a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and use the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,066 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
US Application No. 18/610,066 does not explicitly teach selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value. However, US Application No. 18/610,066 teaches “selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources”. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art would arrive to the claim 1 of the instant application as it is an obvious design choice.
11. A method, comprising: obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting a most optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value;
in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; and
in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as non-compliant; and
in response to identifying no compliant source:
selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources;
selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and
using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,066 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
US Application No. 18/610,066 does not explicitly teach selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value. However, US Application No. 18/610,066 teaches “selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources”. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art would arrive to the claim 1 of the instant application as it is an obvious design choice.
13. The method of claim 11, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
19. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: select an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identify the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select a most optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
8. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value; in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; and in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as non-compliant; and in response to identifying no compliant source: select a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; select a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and use the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,066 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
US Application No. 18/610,066 does not explicitly teach selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value. However, US Application No. 18/610,066 teaches “selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources”. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art would arrive to the claim 1 of the instant application as it is an obvious design choice.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of provisional nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9, 14, 16, 17 and 18 of US Application No. 18/610,060. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 18/610,063
US Application No.
18/610,060
Interpretation/Differences
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant;
in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources:
selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and
in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value;
in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; and
in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as non-compliant; and
in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source to provide a location of the user device using the location-based service via the cellular communications network.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,060 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source, selecting an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source, selecting an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source comprises: for each corresponding compliant source of the at least one compliant source, determining a combined score from a combination of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source; and selecting the optimum compliant source based on the combined score for each of the at least one compliant source.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source comprises: for each corresponding compliant source of the at least one compliant source, determining a combined score from a combination of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source; and selecting the most optimum compliant source based on the combined score for each of the at least one compliant source.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
9. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: select an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identify the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
14. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using the location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value; in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; and in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as non-compliant; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source to provide a location of the user device using the location-based service.
17. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source: select an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant.
18. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source: select an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,060 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
10. The computing system of claim 9, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source, select an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
16. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source, select an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
11. A method, comprising: obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting a most optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
1. A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a cellular communications network;
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source;
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source;
determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value;
in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant; and
in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as non-compliant; and
in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source to provide a location of the user device using the location-based service via the cellular communications network.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,060 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
13. The method of claim 11, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
14. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source, selecting an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source, selecting an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
15. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determining if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identifying the corresponding source as compliant.
16. The method of claim 11, wherein selecting the optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source comprises: for each corresponding compliant source of the at least one compliant source, determining a combined score from a combination of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source; and selecting the optimum compliant source based on the combined score for each of the at least one compliant source.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source comprises: for each corresponding compliant source of the at least one compliant source, determining a combined score from a combination of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source; and selecting the most optimum compliant source based on the combined score for each of the at least one compliant source.
17. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service.
18. The method of claim 11, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service.
19. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: select an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identify the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select a most optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source.
14. A computing system, comprising: a memory configured to store computer instructions; and a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to: obtain, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using the location-based service; for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source; determine a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source; determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets a threshold vertical uncertainty value; in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant; and in response to determining that at least one of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold horizontal uncertainty value or the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source fails to meet the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as non-compliant; and in response to identifying at least one compliant source, select an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source to provide a location of the user device using the location-based service.
17. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source: select an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant.
18. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source: select an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources: determine if both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value; and in response to determining that both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source meets the alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value, identify the corresponding source as compliant.
As can be seen from the side-by-side comparison, US Application No. 18/610,060 has every feature/limitation that the present application does with slight word changes with the exception of the bolded, italicized, and underlined feature in the present application.
20. The computing system of claim 19, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source, select an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
16. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: in response to identifying no compliant source, select an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zorgui et al., (US 20220322055 A1 and Zorgui hereinafter), in view of Xiao et al. (US 12082091 B1 and Xiao hereinafter), further in view of Nykanen et al. (US 20020173317 A1 and Nykanen hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Zorgui teaches A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources (Figure 3 and Paragraph 0064; fusion logic 380 may comprise a positioning engine capable of providing a combined positioning output using multiple sources of data, including one or more positioning methods (e.g., RAT-dependent positioning 310 and/or RAT-independent positioning 315), as well as sensor data 335 from one or more sensors), horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service (Figure 1 and Paragraph 0030; base station 120 that can send and receive information with mobile device 105. Paragraph 0037; a location of mobile device 105 may comprise an absolute location of mobile device 105 (e.g. a latitude and longitude and possibly altitude) or a relative location of mobile device 105 (e.g. a location expressed as distances north or south, east or west and possibly above or below some other known fixed location or some other location such as a location for mobile device 105 at some known previous time). A location may be specified as a geodetic location comprising coordinates which may be absolute (e.g. latitude, longitude and optionally altitude), relative (e.g. relative to some known absolute location) or local (e.g. X, Y and optionally Z coordinates according to a coordinate system defined relative to a local area);
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
determining a horizontal location uncertainty of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source (Paragraph 0037; a location may further include an uncertainty or error indication, such as a horizontal and possibly vertical distance by which the location is expected to be in error or an indication of an area or volume (e.g. a circle or ellipse) within which mobile device 105 is expected to be located with some level of confidence (e.g. 95% confidence));
determining a vertical location uncertainty of the vertical location data for the corresponding source (Paragraph 0037; a location may further include an uncertainty or error indication, such as a horizontal and possibly vertical distance by which the location is expected to be in error or an indication of an area or volume (e.g. a circle or ellipse) within which mobile device 105 is expected to be located with some level of confidence (e.g. 95% confidence));
in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value (Paragraph 0075; trigger condition information may comprise information regarding accuracy of sensor data from the mobile device, accuracy and/or uncertainty of a position determination of the mobile device, and/or conditions that could have an impact on these accuracy measurements (e.g., sensor errors, signal quality, etc.). Paragraph 0077; the trigger condition(s) for activating sensor data reporting may vary, depending on desired functionality. For example, if and estimated position of the mobile device by the location server has a relatively large uncertainty, or relatively low accuracy, sensor data reporting can improve performance by reducing uncertainty/increasing accuracy. The uncertainty or accuracy of the position determination, which may be reflective of a quality or accuracy of measurements used to make the position determination, is often determined as a matter of course when the position determination is made. This uncertainty value exceeding a threshold (or an accuracy value dropping below a threshold) may itself be a trigger condition for activating sensor data reporting or may be one of many factors considered when activating sensor data reporting), identifying the corresponding source as compliant (Paragraph 0077; this uncertainty value exceeding a threshold (or an accuracy value dropping below a threshold) may itself be a trigger condition for activating sensor data reporting or may be one of many factors considered when activating sensor data reporting. Paragraph 0080; the trigger conditions for deactivating sensor data reporting may vary. If trigger conditions for activating the sensor data reporting are no longer met, it may trigger deactivation of the sensor data reporting. Thus, trigger conditions for deactivating sensor data reporting may comprise, for example, an uncertainty value of a mobile device position estimation falling below a threshold (or an accuracy value exceeding a threshold)).
Zorgui does not explicitly teach in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources: selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value; and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value. In an analogous art, Xiao teaches in response to identifying no compliant source among the plurality of sources (Figure 4 and Col 2 Lines 15-24; each of the A-GPS location and the DBH location may be associated with horizontal and vertical uncertainty values, which can have significant detrimental consequences because it may obfuscate or be misinforming of the potential area in which a caller may be located): selecting an alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; location report 460 includes values for altitude and geographic coordinates. The uncertainty values of the horizontal and vertical components of the DBH location and the A-GPS locations may be compared to determine the contents of the location report 460. The contents of the location report 460 may be selects based on determining the lowest of one or more uncertainty values); and for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources, identifying the corresponding source as compliant in response to both the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the alternate threshold horizontal uncertainty value and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source satisfying the threshold vertical uncertainty value (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; the horizontal uncertainty of the first uncertainty value may be compared to the horizontal uncertainty of the second uncertainty value to determine the lower horizontal uncertainty value. In some embodiments the first uncertainty value or the second uncertainty value may lack a horizontal and/or vertical component. In such an embodiment, the vertical and horizontal components associated with the other uncertainty value may be selected even though the uncertainty values associated with the available components may be higher. Thus, the available horizontal and/or vertical components of the first or second uncertainty values may be selected as the lowest uncertainty value. Figure 5 and Col 11 Lines 21-53, Figure 6 and Col 12 Lines 46 – Col 13 Lines 10, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 30-61; a location report is generated based on comparing the first location to the second location, the location report may include the vertical component of the DBH location and the horizontal component of the A-GPS location. In other examples, the location report may include the horizontal component of both the DBH location and the A-GPS location). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
The combination of Zorgui and Xiao does not explicitly teach in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliance. In an analogous art, Nykanen teaches in response to identifying at least one compliant source, selecting an optimum compliant source from the at least one compliance (Figure 2A and Paragraph 0037; the intelligent positioning service determines whether both sources of positioning information are available and of sufficient accuracy. Paragraph 0039 and 0042; if it is determined that both sources are available and of sufficient accuracy, the intelligent positioning server compares the accuracy of the two sources of location information. If terminal-originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-90 where that source is used. If network originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-99 where that source is used). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen because there is a need for a system and method whereby a local application may interface with a single API and be automatically connected to the appropriate source of terminal location information (Nykanen, Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Xiao teaches selecting the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service (Figure 5 and Col 11 Lines 21-53, Figure 6 and Col 12 Lines 46 – Col 13 Lines 10, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 30-61; a location report is generated based on comparing the first location to the second location, the location report may include the vertical component of the DBH location and the horizontal component of the A-GPS location. In other examples, the location report may include the horizontal component of both the DBH location and the A-GPS location). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Nykanen teaches employing the horizontal location data and the vertical location data of the optimum compliant source to determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service (Figure 2A and Paragraph 0037; the intelligent positioning service determines whether both sources of positioning information are available and of sufficient accuracy. Paragraph 0039 and 0042; if it is determined that both sources are available and of sufficient accuracy, the intelligent positioning server compares the accuracy of the two sources of location information. If terminal-originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-90 where that source is used. If network originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-99 where that source is used). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen because there is a need for a system and method whereby a local application may interface with a single API and be automatically connected to the appropriate source of terminal location information (Nykanen, Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Xiao teaches in response to identifying no compliant source, selecting an optimum non-compliant source from the plurality of sources (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; location report 460 includes values for altitude and geographic coordinates. The uncertainty values of the horizontal and vertical components of the DBH location and the A-GPS locations may be compared to determine the contents of the location report 460. The contents of the location report 460 may be selects based on determining the lowest of one or more uncertainty values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Claim 5 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1. Further, Xiao teaches selecting an alternate threshold vertical uncertainty value (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; the horizontal uncertainty of the first uncertainty value may be compared to the horizontal uncertainty of the second uncertainty value to determine the lower horizontal uncertainty value. In some embodiments the first uncertainty value or the second uncertainty value may lack a horizontal and/or vertical component. In such an embodiment, the vertical and horizontal components associated with the other uncertainty value may be selected even though the uncertainty values associated with the available components may be higher. Thus, the available horizontal and/or vertical components of the first or second uncertainty values may be selected as the lowest uncertainty value. Figure 5 and Col 11 Lines 21-53, Figure 6 and Col 12 Lines 46 – Col 13 Lines 10, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 30-61; a location report is generated based on comparing the first location to the second location, the location report may include the vertical component of the DBH location and the horizontal component of the A-GPS location. In other examples, the location report may include the horizontal component of both the DBH location and the A-GPS location). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Zorgui teaches wherein selecting the optimum compliant source from the at least one compliant source comprises: for each corresponding compliant source of the at least one compliant source, determining a combined score from a combination of the horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source and the vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding compliant source (Paragraph 0037; a location may further include an uncertainty or error indication, such as a horizontal and vertical distance by which the location is expected to be in error or an indication of an area or volume (e.g. a circle or ellipse) within which mobile device 105 is expected to be located with some level of confidence (e.g. 95% confidence). Examiner asserts the area would be a combined score).
In addition, Nykanen teaches selecting the optimum compliant source based on the combined score for each of the at least one compliant source (Figure 2A and Paragraph 0037; the intelligent positioning service determines whether both sources of positioning information are available and of sufficient accuracy. Paragraph 0039 and 0042; if it is determined that both sources are available and of sufficient accuracy, the intelligent positioning server compares the accuracy of the two sources of location information. If terminal-originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-90 where that source is used. If network originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-99 where that source is used). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen because there is a need for a system and method whereby a local application may interface with a single API and be automatically connected to the appropriate source of terminal location information (Nykanen, Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Xiao teaches in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and using the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data as captured location data for the user device using the location-based service (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; the horizontal uncertainty of the first uncertainty value may be compared to the horizontal uncertainty of the second uncertainty value to determine the lower horizontal uncertainty value. In some embodiments the first uncertainty value or the second uncertainty value may lack a horizontal and/or vertical component. In such an embodiment, the vertical and horizontal components associated with the other uncertainty value may be selected even though the uncertainty values associated with the available components may be higher. Thus, the available horizontal and/or vertical components of the first or second uncertainty values may be selected as the lowest uncertainty value. Figure 5 and Col 11 Lines 21-53, Figure 6 and Col 12 Lines 46 – Col 13 Lines 10, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 30-61; a location report is generated based on comparing the first location to the second location, the location report may include the vertical component of the DBH location and the horizontal component of the A-GPS location. In other examples, the location report may include the horizontal component of both the DBH location and the A-GPS location). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Xiao teaches in response to identifying no compliant source: selecting a lowest horizontal location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; selecting a lowest vertical location uncertainty from among the plurality of sources; and employing the selected lowest horizontal location data and the selected lowest vertical location data (Figure 4 and Col 9 Lines 10-39, Figure 5 and Col 10 Lines 61 – Col 11 Lines 21, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 3-30; the horizontal uncertainty of the first uncertainty value may be compared to the horizontal uncertainty of the second uncertainty value to determine the lower horizontal uncertainty value. In some embodiments the first uncertainty value or the second uncertainty value may lack a horizontal and/or vertical component. In such an embodiment, the vertical and horizontal components associated with the other uncertainty value may be selected even though the uncertainty values associated with the available components may be higher. Thus, the available horizontal and/or vertical components of the first or second uncertainty values may be selected as the lowest uncertainty value. Figure 5 and Col 11 Lines 21-53, Figure 6 and Col 12 Lines 46 – Col 13 Lines 10, Figure 7 and Col 14 Lines 30-61; a location report is generated based on comparing the first location to the second location, the location report may include the vertical component of the DBH location and the horizontal component of the A-GPS location. In other examples, the location report may include the horizontal component of both the DBH location and the A-GPS location). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui and Xiao because it would provide a more accurate location report may be generated such that the potential area in which a caller may be located is reduced, making it more likely that first responders will be able to quickly locate the distressed caller (Xiao, Col 2 Lines 34-65).
In addition, Nykanen teaches determine if the cellular communications network is providing compliant location data across a plurality of uses of the location-based service (Figure 2A and Paragraph 0037; the intelligent positioning service determines whether both sources of positioning information are available and of sufficient accuracy. Paragraph 0039 and 0042; if it is determined that both sources are available and of sufficient accuracy, the intelligent positioning server compares the accuracy of the two sources of location information. If terminal-originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-90 where that source is used. If network originated location information is found to be more accurate, flow proceeds to step 2a-99 where that source is used). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zorgui, Xiao and Nykanen because there is a need for a system and method whereby a local application may interface with a single API and be automatically connected to the appropriate source of terminal location information (Nykanen, Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1. Further, Zorgui teaches a computing system (Paragraph 0116; computer system), comprising:
a memory configured to store computer instructions (Paragraphs 0117 and 0120; computer system may include one or more non-transitory storage device. A set of these instructions and/or code might be stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium); and
a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to perform functions (Paragraph 0119; computer system includes a processing unit execute code/instruction to perform one or more operations).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites similar features as claim 4, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 4.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites similar features as claims 1 and 5, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claims 1 and 5.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites similar features as claim 2, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites similar features as claim 3, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 3.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites similar features as claim 4, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 4.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites similar features as claims 1 and 5, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claims 1 and 5.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites similar features as claim 6, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 recites similar features as claim 7, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites similar features as claim 8, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites similar features as claim 11, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 11. Further, Zorgui teaches a computing system (Paragraph 0116; computer system), comprising:
a memory configured to store computer instructions (Paragraphs 0117 and 0120; computer system may include one or more non-transitory storage device. A set of these instructions and/or code might be stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium); and
a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to perform functions (Paragraph 0119; computer system includes a processing unit execute code/instruction to perform one or more operations).
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites similar features as claim 14, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 14.
Pertinent but not Cited References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Karampatsis et al. (US 20250020757 A1) discloses analyzing location measurement horizontal and/or vertical accuracy.
Koltsov et al. (US 20230061468 A1) discloses assessing wireless service condition based on horizontal and vertical location accuracy readings.
Piett et al. (US 20190342742 A1) discloses real time over the top 911 caller location data satisfy horizontal and vertical accuracy information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F.
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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jing Gao/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
