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
This office action is in response to the claims received on 9/3/2026.
Examiner's Recommendations
The following are suggestions for the Applicants to overcome the rejections in the current office action; however, an additional search would be required in order to determine allowability. The dependent claims would have to be amended in a way that matches the terminology of the following:
1. (Amended) A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
transmitting, by the UE, one or more capability messages to a location server;
retrieving, by the location server, from the one or more capability messages, one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps;
deriving, by the location server, from each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels;
receiving, by the UE, a configuration message from a base station ;
retrieving, by the UE, from the configuration message, one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS; and
processing PRS, by the UE, without measurement gaps and within said one type of PRS processing window.
26. (Amended) A user equipment (UE), comprising:
a memory;
at least one transceiver; and
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the at least one transceiver, the at least one processor configured to:
transmit, by the UE and via the at least one transceiver, one or more capability messages to a location server ;
retrieve, by the location server, from the one or more capability messages, one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps;
derive, by the location server, from each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels;
receive, by the UE and via the at least one transceiver, a configuration message from a base station ;
retrieve, by the UE and via the at least one transceiver, from the configuration message, one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS; and
process PRS, by the UE and via the at least one transceiver, without measurement gaps and within said one type of PRS processing window.
29. (Amended) A user equipment (UE), comprising:
means for transmitting, by the UE, one or more capability messages to a location server ;
means for retrieving, by the location server, from the one or more capability messages, one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps;
means for deriving, by the location server, from each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels;
means for receiving, by the UE, a configuration message from a base station ;
means for retrieving, by the UE, from the configuration message, one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS; and
means for processing PRS, by the UE, without measurement gaps and within said one type of PRS processing window.
30. (Amended) A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a user equipment (UE), cause the UE to:
transmit, by the UE, one or more capability messages to a location server ;
retrieve, by the location server, from the one or more capability messages, one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps;
derive, by the location server, from each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels;
receive, by the UE, a configuration message from a base station ;
retrieve, by the UE, from the configuration message, one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS; and
process PRS, by the UE, without measurement gaps and within said one type of PRS processing window.
Claim Interpretation
Plain Meaning (MPEP 2111.01): MPEP 2111.01 states: The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification. An applicant is entitled to be their own lexicographer and may rebut the presumption that claim terms are to be given their ordinary and customary meaning by clearly setting forth a definition of the term that is different from its ordinary and customary meaning(s) in the specification at the relevant time. See In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1480, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
"Non-transitory computer-readable medium": Claim 30 recites a "non-transitory computer-readable medium". The specification mentions "non-transitory" several times from par. 246-270 without redefining this term, and therefore it has its original meaning. The specification defines "computer-readable medium" in par. 275; however, the meaning is very similar to the original meaning, and a "computer-readable medium" may include transitory embodiments if not preceded by "non-transitory". Therefore, claimed "non-transitory computer-readable medium" is interpreted as a memory device, which isn’t a nonce word or a replacement for “means” as explained in MPEP 2181. Claimed "non-transitory computer-readable medium" also excludes transitory embodiments, and therefore, is eligible under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 1, it is a method claim, it is the broadest independent claim, and it is interpreted as: 1. A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
transmitting one or more capability messages to a first network entity, the one or more capability messages (The functional language after claimed “messages” does not limit the claim. See MPEP 2111.05 “Functional and Nonfunctional Descriptive Material” In re DiStefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848, 117 USPQ2d 1265, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In this case, the claimed contents of the message are not functionally related to the claimed operation of transmitting the message) indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps, wherein (this "wherein" clause doesn't have patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04: In Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 1329, 74 USPQ2d 1481, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 2005), the court noted that a "whereby clause in a method claim is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited." In this case, the transmitting operation could take place regardless of the claimed “types” of windows in this wherein clause) each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels; and
receiving a configuration message from a second network entity, the configuration message (The functional language after claimed “message” does not limit the claim. See MPEP 2111.05 “Functional and Nonfunctional Descriptive Material” In re DiStefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848, 117 USPQ2d 1265, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In this case, the claimed contents of the message are not functionally related to the claimed operation of receiving the message) indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS.
Claim Interpretation under 35 USC 112, sixth paragraph
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.
Such claim limitations are, in claim 29:
means for transmitting one or more capability messages to a…
means for receiving a configuration message from a…
The above-cited limitations use generic placeholder “means”, coupled with functional language after transitional word “for” (MPEP 2181 does not require a transitional word, such as “for”, or “configured to”) without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholders are not preceded by structural modifiers.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification and drawings shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation (please refer to par. 69 in reference to Fig. 3A of the Drawings): "The UE 302 and the base station 304 each include one or more wireless wide area network (WWAN) transceivers 310 and 350, respectively, providing means for communicating (e.g., means for transmitting, means for receiving, means for measuring, means for tuning, means for refraining from transmitting, etc.) via one or more wireless communication networks…" In addition, par. 76 of the specification cites "positioning components" as "means" for performing the functions described by the limitations which invoke interpretation under 35 USC 112(f), and par. 76 explains that these positioning components are hardware circuits or memory which belong to the same transceivers 310 and 360. Therefore, clearly, claimed "means" equate to a transceiver.
Generic placeholders are definite: the structure described in the Specification and Drawings as explained in the current office action is: a. present; b. sufficient to perform the function that follows in the corresponding functional limitation; and c. capable of performing the function, and the specification clearly links the structure to the claimed function, because the corresponding structure includes a transceiver, and the disclosure in the specification does link, in the description of Fig. 3A, the structure to the claimed function. Therefore, the generic placeholders are not a reason for rendering indefinite the limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner's interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this office action.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with regards to claims and rejection analysis have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: Applicants argue, on page 10, that independent claim 1 recites, inter alia: (1) "the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying for PRS processing without measurement gaps"; (2) "receiving a configuration message from a second network entity, the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS"; and (3) "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels." Thus, claim 1 recites an interrelated set of features: the capability messages identify the types of PRS processing windows that the UE can apply without measurement gaps; the configuration message identifies one type from those types for the UE to use; and each type indicates a different UE capability for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels.
Examiner’s response to Argument 1: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because the Applicant’s Argument 1 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In this case, the independent claims do not recite the argued “interrelated set of features” because the functional language after claimed “messages” does not limit the claims. See MPEP 2111.05 “Functional and Nonfunctional Descriptive Material” In re DiStefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848, 117 USPQ2d 1265, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In this case, the claimed contents of the message are not functionally related to the claimed operation of transmitting the message.
Argument 2: Applicants argue, on page 10, that for feature (1), the Office Action relies on Zheng [0045]-[0046] and FIG. 5. Zheng, [0045] states, in relevant part: Zheng [0045] "For example, configuration 501 can include/introduce/provide/be configured with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window. In another example, the configuration 502 can include only the DL PRS measurement time window (e.g., without the measurement gap) .... " The Office Action characterizes these as "two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap" (Office Action, page 9). Thus, the two configurations relied upon by the Office are distinguished by whether a measurement gap is configured together with the DL PRS measurement time window.
Examiner’s response to Argument 2: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because the Applicant’s Argument 2 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In this case, the independent claims do not require an exclusion of the argued “the two configurations relied upon by the Office are distinguished by whether a measurement gap is configured together with the DL PRS measurement time window”. In other words, the claims don’t recite a feature which would forbid either the argued “two configurations relied upon” or “distinguished by whether a measurement gap is configured together with the DL PRS measurement time window”. Furthermore, the functional language after claimed “messages” does not limit the claims. See MPEP 2111.05 “Functional and Nonfunctional Descriptive Material” In re DiStefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848, 117 USPQ2d 1265, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In this case, the claimed contents of the message are not functionally related to the claimed operation of transmitting the message.
Argument 3: Applicants argue, on page 10, that the Office Action states that "[t]he first embodiment of Zheng does not teach" feature (3), namely, "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels" (Office Action, page 10). To address this deficiency, the Office relies on a different disclosure in Zheng [0047]-[0048], which states that Type 1 "can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels ... in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window," whereas Type 2 "can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS" (Office Action, page 10). Applicant respectfully disagrees that these disclosures address the deficiency. For convenience, Zheng [0047]-[0048] are reproduced below: Zheng [0047] "The UE can provide capability information to IMF (e.g., wireless communication element or remote component) via LPP message. The UE capability information can include the types of DL PRS measurement time window (e.g., the first type of DL PRS measurement time window and/or the second type of DL PRS measurement time window) that are supported by the UE. For instance, the UE capability information can include/indicate at least one of the two types of DL PRS measurement time window supported by UE. The first type (Type I) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE." [Emphasis added.] Zheng [0048] "In further example, the second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS. The other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE." [Emphasis added.] Zheng [0047]-[0048], as highlighted above, describes that the UE may provide capability information to the LMF indicating support for two types of DL PRS measurement time windows. However, these passages do not disclose either (2) "receiving a configuration message from a second network entity, the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS," or (3) "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels," as recited in claim 1.
Examiner’s response to Argument 3: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because the Applicant’s Argument 3 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In this case, the Applicants argue that “these passages do not disclose either (2) … or (3)”; however, the claims don’t set a requirement as to which passages of a reference may or may not disclose each claim excerpt. Furthermore, the functional language after claimed “messages” does not limit the claims. See MPEP 2111.05 “Functional and Nonfunctional Descriptive Material” In re DiStefano, 808 F.3d 845, 848, 117 USPQ2d 1265, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In this case, the claimed contents of the message are not functionally related to the claimed operation of transmitting the message.
Argument 4: Applicants argue, on page 11, that Rather, Zheng separately describes UE capability signaling and two types of measurement window behavior, without disclosing the claimed relationship between them-namely, a configuration message from the network indicating one of the types previously identified by the UE. In particular, Zheng does not disclose that the LMF selects Type 1 or Type 2 and communicates that selection to the UE as the type the UE is expected to use. Claim 1 recites more than merely disclosing multiple window types and a network configuration message. The configuration message, as recited in claim 1, indicates "one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows"-i.e., one type from the types indicated by the UE's capability signaling. The Office Action cites Zheng [0037]-[0038], which describe an LMF providing DL PRS configuration information to the UE through an LPP Provide Assistance Data message, together with [0045]-[0046], which describe configurations 501 and 502 (see Office Action, page 9). But the cited portions do not establish that this configuration message indicates Type 1 or Type 2, or that it indicates one type from among the PRS processing-window types identified by the UE's capability information. The rejection therefore relies on separate disclosures in Zheng without identifying the claimed connection between them.
Examiner’s response to Argument 4: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because in response to applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., for example, the argued “that the LMF selects Type 1 or Type 2 and communicates that selection to the UE”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In this case, Argument 4 recites features which are not claimed, for example:
A requirement ruling out a reference which would arguably “separately describes UE capability signaling and two types of measurement window behavior, without disclosing the claimed relationship between them-namely, a configuration message from the network indicating one of the types previously identified by the UE”.
The argued “the LMF selects Type 1 or Type 2 and communicates that selection to the UE as the type the UE is expected to use”.
The argued “more than merely disclosing multiple window types and a network configuration message” or “one type from the types indicated by the UE's capability signaling”.
The argued “establish that this configuration message indicates Type 1 or Type 2, or that it indicates one type from among the PRS processing-window types identified by the UE's capability information”.
There is no New Ground of Rejection
The instant office action doesn't add any new grounds of rejection. According to MPEP 706.07(a), guidance in determining what constitutes a new ground of rejection is best provided by MPEP § 1207.03(a); and according to MPEP § 1207.03(a):
I. Factual situations that constitute a new ground of rejection are as follows:
1. Changing the statutory basis of rejection from 35 U.S.C. 102 to 35 U.S.C. 103.
2. Changing the statutory basis of rejection from 35 U.S.C. 103 to 35 U.S.C. 102, based on a different teaching.
3. Citing new calculations in support of overlapping ranges.
4. Citing new structure in support of structural obviousness.
5. Pointing to a different portion of the claim to maintain a "new matter" rejection.
II. Factual situations that do not constitute a new ground of rejection are as follows:
1. Citing a different portion of a reference to elaborate upon that which has been cited previously.
2. Changing the statutory basis of rejection from 35 U.S.C. 103 to 35 U.S.C. 102, but relying on the same teachings.
3. Relying on fewer than all references in support of a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, but relying on the same teachings.
4. Changing the order of references in the statement of rejection, but relying on the same teachings of those references.
5. Considering, in order to respond to applicant’s arguments, other portions of a reference submitted by the applicant.
Based on the factual situations listed in MPEP 1207.03(a), the instant office action doesn't add any new grounds of rejection.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: The incoming written opinion from the International Search Authority, received on 2/12/2024, and the IDS received on 2/12/2024, both cite ZTE: "Discussion on Latency Reduction for NR Positioning", 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #106b-e, R1-2108881, 3GPP Mobile Competence Centre, 650, France, Vol. RAN WG1, No. e-Meeting, 20211011 -20211019, 1 October 2021, 13 Pages, XP052057757, hereinafter R1-2108881. R1-2108881 teaches in section 4 that the gNB sends to the UE a MeasGapConfig information element via RRC signalling. In other words, the gNB sends a measurement gap configuration message to the UE. Section 7.1 teaches, in reference to Fig. 2, that the UE provides its capabilities for the PRS processing window to a Location Management Function (LMF) and also to its serving gNB. The LMF in its turn sends a configuration of start time, the duration and the type of the PRS processing window to the UE. Section 7.3 explains that UE is expected to calculate and provide a location information report to the LMF before a response time, where the response time should be large enough to ensure that UE can conduct all DL PRS measurements within the measurement gap in a measurement period defined in 3GPP standard TS 38.133. Section 7.3 appears to teach away from the independent claims because it recites that "As shown in Figure 4 below, UE cannot measure DL PRS without measurement gap after BWP switching. For the purpose of positioning latency reduction, a measurement gap should be triggered simultaneously with the BWP switching so that UE can continue measuring DL PRS inside the measurement gap". Proposal 5 on page 12 also appears to teach away from the independent claims: "Proposal 5: For the sake of latency reduction related to the measurement gap, Rel-17 should allow LMF to request measurement gap." Section 7.4 explains what PRS processing window is used for, and that it is divided into a buffering window and a computation window. However, this reference falls short of PRS processing window types.
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 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.
Joint Inventors, Common Ownership Presumed
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 at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed 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 at the time a later invention was effectively filed 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.
Test for Obviousness
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 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1-7, 22-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al (publication number 2024/0284389), hereinafter Zheng.
Regarding claim 1, Zheng teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE, UE represented in Zheng Fig. 3, described in par. 37 as a method), comprising:
transmitting one or more capability messages to a first network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB), the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) for PRS processing without measurement gaps (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap); and
receiving a configuration message from a second network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF), the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS (Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol in a Provide Assistance Data message. Par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: Configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; and configuration 502 with the DL PRS measurement time window but without the measurement gap).
The first embodiment of Zheng does not explicitly teach "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels".
However, a second embodiment of Zheng teaches: wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of the first embodiment of Zheng, by incorporating the teachings of the second embodiment of Zheng into the first embodiment of Zheng, in order to reduce the latency for a location information report (Zheng par. 35-36).
Regarding claims 2, 27, Zheng teaches wherein, for a first type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, the UE is expected to prioritize PRS processing over all other downlink signals on all downlink component carriers in all symbols inside the PRS processing windows (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: 501 and 502. Par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window.)
Regarding claims 3, 28, Zheng teaches wherein, for a second type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, the UE is expected to prioritize PRS processing over all other downlink signals on a downlink component carrier or a frequency band in all symbols inside the PRS processing windows (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: 501 and 502. Par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE. Alternatively, Zheng's "Type 2" also meets claim 3 in Zheng par. 48, 73: the second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS. The remaining DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE).
Regarding claim 4, Zheng teaches wherein: the one or more capability messages indicate that PRS processing on the downlink component carrier or the frequency band will impact downlink reception in one or more second component carriers or frequency bands (Zheng par. 73: In type 1, the DL PRS measurement/reception may be prioritized over all other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. In this type, the other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of i) all carriers (or all serving cells) of the UE, ii) all carriers (or all serving cells) in a same frequency band of the UE – therefore, one or more second component carrier may also be impacted).
Regarding claim 5, Zheng teaches wherein, for a third type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows, the UE is expected to prioritize PRS processing over all other downlink signals only in symbols inside the PRS processing windows during which the UE measures and/or processes PRS (Zheng par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Regarding claim 6, Zheng teaches wherein the UE is expected to apply the one type of PRS processing window across all component carriers, a single component carrier, or a single frequency band (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE – therefore, the PRS processing window applies to a single frequency band as claimed).
Regarding claim 7, Zheng teaches wherein the PRS processing windows do not overlap across component carriers, within a component carrier, or within a frequency band (Zheng par. 60: If there is at least a measurement gap overlapped/positioned in/collided with the DL PRS measurement time window, the UE may not be required to provide the first location information report to the LMF – therefore, there must be another case where the measurement gap does not overlap. Furthermore, Fig. 5 represents PRS measurement time windows which do not overlap).
Regarding claim 22, Zheng teaches wherein: the first network entity is a location server (Zheng Fig. 3: UE, gNB, LMF are all interconnected; therefore, it would have been obvious for either two entities to exchange messages. Par. 40: LMF is a location server), the second network entity is the location server (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF; Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol – therefore, the second entity is the LMF), the one or more capability messages are one or more Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages (Zheng par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: UE provides capability information to LMF via LPP message. Par. 38: LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol), and the configuration message is an LPP message (Zheng par. 38: UE configuration via a LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol).
Regarding claim 23, Zheng teaches wherein: the first network entity is a serving base station of the UE (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB; serving gNB), the second network entity is the serving base station (Zheng Fig. 3: UE, gNB, LMF are all interconnected; therefore, it would have been obvious for either two entities to exchange messages), the one or more capability messages are one or more radio resource control (RRC) or medium access control control element (MAC-CE) messages (Zheng par. 53: the serving gNB configures/provides/transmits/modifies a measurement gap to/for the UE through RRC signaling), and the configuration message is an RRC or MAC-CE message (Zheng par. 35: the UE capability information may also be provided to serving gNB (e.g., wireless communication node or base station) via RRC signaling).
Regarding claim 24, Zheng teaches wherein: the first network entity is a location server (Zheng Fig. 3: UE, gNB, LMF are all interconnected; therefore, it would have been obvious for either two entities to exchange messages. Par. 40: LMF is a location server), the second network entity is a serving base station of the UE (Zheng Fig. 3: UE, gNB, LMF are all interconnected; therefore, it would have been obvious for either two entities to exchange messages), the one or more capability messages are one or more Long-Tenn Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages (Zheng par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: UE provides capability information to LMF via LPP message. Par. 38: LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol), and the configuration message is an RRC or MAC-CE message (Zheng par. 35: the UE capability information may also be provided to serving gNB (e.g., wireless communication node or base station) via RRC signaling).
Regarding claim 25, Zheng teaches measuring one or more PRS resources from at least one transmission-reception point (TRP, Zheng par. 8: An assistance data reference Transmission Reception Point (TRP) is a TRP where one or more DL PRSs are transmitted from a serving cell of the UE; par. 35: UE measures the DL PRS resources); processing the one or more PRS resources during at least one of the PRS processing windows (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations); and reporting a result of the processing the one or more PRS resources to a location server (Zheng par. 44: UE measures the DL PRS resources and transmits a measurement report to the LMF).
Regarding claim 26, Zheng teaches a user equipment (UE, UE represented in Zheng Fig. 3 described in par. 37 as a method), comprising:
a memory (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: memory 234);
at least one transceiver (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: transceiver 230); and
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the at least one transceiver, the at least one processor (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: processor 236) configured to:
transmit, via the at least one transceiver, one or more capability messages to a first network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB), the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) for PRS processing without measurement gaps (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap); and
receive, via the at least one transceiver, a configuration message from a second network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF), the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS (Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol in a Provide Assistance Data message. Par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: Configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; and configuration 502 with the DL PRS measurement time window but without the measurement gap).
The first embodiment of Zheng does not explicitly teach "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels".
However, a second embodiment of Zheng teaches: wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of the first embodiment of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of the second embodiment of Zheng into the first embodiment of Zheng in order to reduce the latency for a location information report (Zheng par. 35-36).
Regarding claim 29, Zheng teaches a user equipment (UE, UE represented in Zheng Fig. 3 described in par. 37 as a method), comprising:
means (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: transceiver 230) for transmitting one or more capability messages to a first network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB), the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) for PRS processing without measurement gaps (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap); and
means (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: transceiver 230) for receiving a configuration message from a second network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF), the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS (Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol in a Provide Assistance Data message. Par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: Configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; and configuration 502 with the DL PRS measurement time window but without the measurement gap).
The first embodiment of Zheng does not explicitly teach "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels".
However, a second embodiment of Zheng teaches: wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of the first embodiment of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of the second embodiment of Zheng into the first embodiment of Zheng in order to reduce the latency for a location information report (Zheng par. 35-36).
Regarding claim 30, Zheng teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: memory 234 having instructions as in par. 31) that, when executed by a user equipment (UE, UE represented in Zheng Fig. 3 described in par. 37 as a method), cause the UE to:
transmit one or more capability messages to a first network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB), the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) for PRS processing without measurement gaps (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap); and
receive a configuration message from a second network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF), the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS (Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol in a Provide Assistance Data message. Par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: Configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; and configuration 502 with the DL PRS measurement time window but without the measurement gap).
The first embodiment of Zheng does not explicitly teach "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels".
However, a second embodiment of Zheng teaches: wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of the first embodiment of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of the second embodiment of Zheng into the first embodiment of Zheng in order to reduce the latency for a location information report (Zheng par. 35-36).
Claims 8-9, 13, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng, and further in view of Cha et al (publication number 2023/0020648), hereinafter Cha.
Regarding claim 8, Zheng teaches transmitting one or more capability messages (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: UE provides capability information to LMF via LPP message); and a "number of positioning frequency layers (PFLs) the UE can process for each of the one or more types of PRS processing windows" (Zheng par. 66: in the DL PRS measurement time window, UE may only be expected to measure DL PRS from one positioning frequency layer).
Zheng does not explicitly teach a "maximum number".
Cha teaches wherein the one or more capability messages (Cha par. 197 and Fig. 7: In step 3b, a capability information transfer procedure may be performed. Specifically, the LMF may transmit a request for capability information to the UE and the UE may transmit the capability information to the LMF) further include a maximum number of positioning frequency layers (PFLs, Cha par. 279, under Table 8, explains the meaning of PFL) the UE can process (Cha par. 318: the UE reports that the UE supports K frequency layers) for each of the one or more types of PRS processing windows (Cha par. 404, 407).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of Cha into the disclosure of Zheng because, as a number of communication devices have required higher communication capacity, the necessity of the mobile broadband communication much improved than the existing radio access technology (RAT) has increased. Massive machine type communications (MTC) capable of providing various services at anytime and anywhere by connecting a number of devices or things to each other has been considered in the next generation communication system. Moreover, a communication system design capable of supporting services/UEs sensitive to reliability and latency is needed (Cha par. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Zheng teaches wherein the one or more capability messages indicate a first type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) during which the UE prioritizes PRS processing over all other downlink signals on all downlink component carriers in all symbols inside the PRS processing windows (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: 501 and 502. Par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window).
Regarding claim 13, Zheng teaches wherein the one or more capability messages indicate a second type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) during which the UE prioritizes PRS processing over all other downlink signals on a downlink component carrier or a frequency band in all symbols inside the PRS processing windows (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: 501 and 502. Par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The other DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE. Alternatively, Zheng's "Type 2" also meets claim 3 in Zheng par. 48, 73: the second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS. The remaining DL signals/channels may be from at least one of all carriers/serving cells of the UE, all carriers in the same frequency band of the UE, or one carrier of the UE).
Regarding claim 17, Zheng teaches wherein the one or more capability messages indicate a third type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) during which the UE prioritizes PRS processing over all other downlink signals only in symbols inside the PRS processing windows during which the UE measures and/or processes PRS (Zheng par. 47-48, 73 in reference to Fig. 5: The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng, and further in view of Chervyakov et al (publication number 2021/0329618), hereinafter Chervyakov.
Regarding claim 21, Zheng does not explicitly teach: "wherein the UE supports more component carriers for carrier aggregation than PFLs for PRS processing".
Chervyakov teaches wherein the UE supports more component carriers for carrier aggregation (Chervyakov par. 20, where a UE is connected simultaneously with a first AN and a second AN, using one component carrier for each connection, therefore, two component carriers) than PFLs for PRS processing (Chervyakov par. 139, where a UE can support only one PFL at a time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of Chervyakov into the disclosure of Zheng, because enhanced mechanisms are needed to determine reference signal time difference RSTD measurement delays for PRS measurements in NR networks (Chervyakov par. 3).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng, and further in view of Aggarwal et al (publication number 2010/0135178), hereinafter Aggarwal.
Regarding claim 29, Zheng teaches a user equipment (UE, UE represented in Zheng Fig. 3 described in par. 37 as a method), comprising:
means (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: transceiver 230) for transmitting one or more capability messages to a first network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: next generation NodeB, gNB), the one or more capability messages indicating one or more types of positioning reference signal (PRS) processing windows that the UE is capable of applying (Zheng Par. 53 and par. 70: UE provides capability information to gNB. Par. 47 in reference to Fig. 3: The UE capability information includes the types of DL PRS measurement time windows that are supported by the UE) for PRS processing without measurement gaps (Zheng par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; configuration 502 includes only the DL PRS measurement time window, without the measurement gap); and
means (Zheng par. 25-27 in reference to Fig. 2: transceiver 230) for receiving a configuration message from a second network entity (Zheng par. 37 in reference to Fig. 3: location management function, LMF), the configuration message indicating one type of PRS processing window of the one or more types of PRS processing windows that the UE is expected to use for PRS processing windows for processing PRS (Zheng par. 37-38 in reference to Fig. 3: The LMF configures the DL PRS configuration forwarded by gNBs to the UE via an LTE positioning protocol (LPP) protocol in a Provide Assistance Data message. Par. 45, 46: Fig. 5 represents two types of UE DL PRS measurement time window configurations: Configuration 501 with both the measurement gap and DL PRS measurement time window; and configuration 502 with the DL PRS measurement time window but without the measurement gap).
The first embodiment of Zheng does not explicitly teach "wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels".
However, a second embodiment of Zheng teaches: wherein each type of the one or more types of PRS processing windows indicates a different capability of the UE for prioritizing PRS processing over processing of other channels (Zheng par. 47-48 in reference to Fig. 5: The first type (Type 1) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels (e.g., CSI-RS, PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) in all symbols inside the DL PRS measurement time window. The second type (Type 2) of DL PRS measurement time window can prioritize the DL PRS measurement/reception over other DL signals/channels only in the symbols inside the window that are configured with DL PRS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of the first embodiment of Zheng by incorporating the teachings of the second embodiment of Zheng into the first embodiment of Zheng in order to reduce the latency for a location information report (Zheng par. 35-36).
Zheng does not explicitly teach "WWAN" in the "means" limitation.
Aggarwal clearly teaches a WWAN transceiver (Aggarwal [0042] When deriving position from the WWAN, each WAN-WAPs 104a-104c may take the form of base stations within a digital cellular network, and the mobile station 108 may include a cellular transceiver and processor).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Zheng, by incorporating the teachings of Aggarwal into the disclosure of Zheng, in order to implement various models, alone or in combination, that exploit wireless signal properties (such as, for example, RTT, signal strength, etc.) which can improve position determination while avoiding costly pre-deployment efforts and/or changes to the network infrastructure (Aggarwal [0011]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12, 14-16, 18-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant’s reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 10, 14, 18, Cha teaches that the capability messages (Cha par. 197 and Fig. 7: In step 3b, a capability information transfer procedure may be performed. Specifically, the LMF may transmit a request for capability information to the UE and the UE may transmit the capability information to the LMF) include a maximum number of positioning frequency layers (PFLs, Cha par. 279, under Table 8, explains the meaning of PFL) the UE can process (Cha par. 318: the UE reports that the UE supports K frequency layers); however, Zheng and Cha fall short of expecting the UE to process a single PFL across all frequency bands.
Regarding claims 11, 15, 19, Cha teaches that the capability messages (Cha par. 197 and Fig. 7: In step 3b, a capability information transfer procedure may be performed. Specifically, the LMF may transmit a request for capability information to the UE and the UE may transmit the capability information to the LMF) include a maximum number of positioning frequency layers (PFLs, Cha par. 279, under Table 8, explains the meaning of PFL) the UE can process (Cha par. 318: the UE reports that the UE supports K frequency layers); however, Zheng and Cha fall short of the maximum number of PFLs that the UE can process for PRS processing being dependent – or not - from a maximum number of PFLs that the UE supports across all positioning methods across all frequency bands.
Regarding claims 12, 16, 20, Cha teaches that the capability messages (Cha par. 197 and Fig. 7: In step 3b, a capability information transfer procedure may be performed. Specifically, the LMF may transmit a request for capability information to the UE and the UE may transmit the capability information to the LMF) include a maximum number of positioning frequency layers (PFLs, Cha par. 279, under Table 8, explains the meaning of PFL) the UE can process (Cha par. 318: the UE reports that the UE supports K frequency layers); however, Zheng and Cha fall short of the maximum number of PFLs that the UE can process for PRS processing being equal to – or not - a maximum number of PFLs that the UE supports across all positioning methods across all frequency bands.
Therefore, in view of their respective base claims, the further limitations of the above-mentioned claims in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, are neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the prior art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD EISNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3334. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Tuesday from 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kathy Wang-Hurst, can be reached at telephone number (571) 270-5371. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats see MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/RONALD EISNER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights