CTNF 18/686,247 CTNF 81246 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 39 , 41-45 , 48, 50 and 60-65 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehnberg et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2015/0327018 A1., hereinafter, ‘Rehnberg’ in view of Fakoorian et al. US Patent Pub. No.:2022/0322035 A1, hereinafter, ‘Fakoorian’ . Consider Claim 39 , and as applied to the method of Claim 58, and as applied to claim 65, Rehnberg teaches a first device ( e.g., the UE 120 figure 3 ) to cause the first device at least to: perform, based on a set of measurement parameters, positioning measurements; and report, at a current reporting instance and to a second device ( e.g., see at least figure 3 ‘301’ measurement report -0046 ), a first part of the positioning measurements with an indication regarding whether or not the first part of the positioning measurements is to be jointly utilized with a second part of the positioning measurements to estimate a location of the first device ( i.e., see action 304 - this is met based on the teachings of at least 0067-0069 – “The determined first type of data is being associated with the measurement data, thereby enabling the position determination... The determined first type of data may be added to the measurement report in connection with the measurement data and/or any time stamp therein indicating the time of measurement. Relevant data from the measurement report may also be extracted from the measurement report and directly or indirectly be connected to the determined first type of data, for example by a common reference number.” See also 0013 ). However, Rehnberg does not specify the hardware elements of the UE. In analogous art, Fakoorian teaches the hardware elements of a UE in at least figure 9 . Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the Hardware components for the purpose of handling the most basic functions of the UE. Consider Claims 41 and 60 , Rehnberg does not specifically teach wherein the assistant information comprises at least one of the following : resources allocated for inactive state data transmission, a number of positioning measurements to be reported by the first device, or a period for reporting the positioning measurements. In analogous art, Fakoorian teaches in 0046 “the LMF 124 may provide a time window associated with each DL-PRS measurement. The LMF 124 may provide an indication of the time window in a Long Term Evolution Positioning Protocol (LPP) provide assistance data message.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein the assistant information comprises at least one a period for reporting the positioning measurements for the purpose of improving position measurements and/or location estimation. Consider Claims 42 and 61 , Rehnberg teaches wherein the set of measurement parameters comprises at least one of the following: a number of reporting instances for reporting a number of positioning measurements configured by the second device, or a number of positioning measurements to be reported in a respective one of the reporting instances. (e.g., this is met by the teachings in at least 0091 – “Rank Indication (RI) Provides information about the channel rank (number of layers or streams that can be used for downlink transmission.) Consider Claims 43 and 62 , Rehnberg teaches wherein the first device is caused to perform the positioning measurement by: measuring, in the time duration between different reporting instances, a group of reference signals on at least a part of preconfigured resources for positioning, wherein the positioning measurements for each of the reporting instances being measured from the same transmission and receipt points (TRPs) or from different TRPs ( e.g., see signals received from enodeB noted in 0127-0128 ). Consider Claims 44 and 63 , Rehnberg teaches wherein the first device is further caused to: determine whether a location of the first device is changed during a time period between the current reporting instance and the last reporting instance; and generate the indication based on a determination result ( i.e., see timepoints when the measurements are taken. The report and calculations are taken at different time points -0065-0066 ). Consider Claim 45 , Rehnberg teaches wherein the change in the location of the first device is determined based on at least one of the following: the positioning measurements, reference signal measurements from a group of transmission and receipt points, or data obtained from one or more sensors of the first device( i.e., see timepoints when the measurements are taken. The report and calculations are taken at different time points -0065-0066 ). Consider Claim 48 , Rehnberg teaches the claimed invention except wherein the first device is further caused to: determine whether a line-of-sight (LOS) condition associated with the first device is changed during a time period between the current reporting instance and the last reporting instance; and generate the indication based on a determination result. In analogous art, Fakoorian teaches LOS versus NLOS path with respect to the positioning measurements ( e.g., see at least 0036 -0037 and 0041-0042 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein the first device is further caused to: determine whether a line-of-sight (LOS) condition associated with the first device is changed during a time period between the current reporting instance and the last reporting instance; and generate the indication based on a determination result since the NLOS effect may impact the accuracy - 0041 . Consider Claim 50 , Rehnberg teaches wherein the first device is a terminal device( e.g., see 120 of figure 1 ), and the second device is a location management function node (140 of figure 1) ( see also figure 1 of Fakoorian ) 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 40 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehnberg et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2015/0327018 A1., hereinafter, ‘Rehnberg’ in view of Fakoorian et al. US Patent Pub. No.:2022/0322035 A1, hereinafter, ‘Fakoorian’ and further in view of Rao et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2023/0379860 A1, hereinafter . Consider claims 40 and 59 , Rehnberg teaches the claimed invention except wherein the first device is further caused to: receive, from the second device, assistant information for reporting the positioning measurements; receive, from a network device, configurations of small data transmission (SDT) for reporting the positioning measurements; and determine the set of measurement parameters based on the assistant information and the configurations of SDT. In analogous art, Fakoorian teaches assistant information for reporting the positioning measurements ( e.g., see at least 0035, 0046 and 0091 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include assistant information for reporting the positioning measurements for the purpose of improving accuracy. However, Rehnberg as modified by Fakoorian does not specifically teach receive, from a network device, configurations of small data transmission (SDT) for reporting the positioning measurements; and determine the set of measurement parameters based on the assistant information and the configurations of SDT. In analogous art, Rao teaches in at least 0553 “ a method implemented in a WTRU of reporting positioning information to a network comprising: receiving assistance data including one or more Positioning Reference Signal (PRS) configurations (each may include a measurement config and a measurement report config), wherein at least one of the PRS configurations are indicated to meet a minimum accuracy requirement; sending an indication (e.g., to a gNB) of the payload sizes (of measurement report(s)) associated with the one or more PRS configurations; receiving a small data transmission (SDT) configuration (e.g., from the gNB) including a data volume threshold (DVT) for SDT (e.g., indicating the maximum payload size for SDT); on condition that at least one PRS config from the one or more received PRS configurations indicated to satisfy the minimum accuracy requirement has an associated payload size less than the DVT for SDT: selecting a PRS config with an associated payload size closest to the DVT for SDT from among the at least one PRS configurations that satisfy the minimum accuracy requirement; and performing PRS measurements and sending a measurement report (to the LMF) based on the selected PRS config using an SDT (e.g., in INACTIVE state), wherein the measurement report indicates the selected PRS config and the DVT for SDT; and on condition that none of the PRS configurations indicated to satisfy the minimum accuracy requirement have an associated payload size less than the DVT for SDT, sending a connection request (e.g., to the gNB) (e.g., to transition to CONNECTED state to be able to send a measurement report) .” Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Rehnberg as modified by Fakoorian to include the noted teachings of Rao to arrive at the claimed invention receiving, from a network device, configurations of small data transmission (SDT) for reporting the positioning measurements; and determine the set of measurement parameters based on the assistant information and the configurations of SDT for the purpose to positioning measurement . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehnberg et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2015/0327018 A1., hereinafter, ‘Rehnberg’ in view of Fakoorian et al. US Patent Pub. No.:2022/0322035 A1, hereinafter, ‘Fakoorian’ and further in view of Bajko US Patent Pub. No.: 2018/0332493 A1, hereinafter . Consider Claim 47 , Rehnberg as modified by Bajko teaches the claimed invention except wherein the first device is further caused to: in accordance with a determination that all of the positioning measurements are reported, transmit a complete message to the second device. In analogous art, Bajko teaches a requesting station “may need to process and take action on the content of the measurement report response in a time sensitive manner. However, a conventional measurement report response can be de-prioritized so that other data such as user voice and video data can be sent, causing the measurement reports to be sent to the requestor sporadically. In contrast, a last measurement report request can provide for determining when a complete measurement report response has been received by the requesting station. The requesting station can therefore configure one or more parameters for communicating on one or more wireless communication links based on the one or more received measurement report elements as soon as it received the last measurement report frame, and does not need to wait to see if additional measurement report frames are to be received.”- (0034 and 0053). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein the first device is further caused to: in accordance with a determination that all of the positioning measurements are reported, transmit a complete message to the second device for the purpose of handling time sensitive data . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 46, 49 and 64 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record des not teach wherein the indication comprises one of the following:a one-bit indicator with a first value indicating the location of the first device is not changed and a second value indicating the location of the first device is changed, or an indicator comprising a plurality of bits each corresponding to a respective one of multiple parts of the positioning measurements, and for each of the bits, the first value indicating a corresponding part to be jointly utilized with the rest of the multiple parts to estimate the location of the first device, and the second value indicating the corresponding part not to be jointly utilized with the rest of the multiple parts and wherein the first device is caused to generate the indication by: in accordance with a determination that the LOS condition is not changed during the time period, setting the indication to a first value indicating that the first and the second parts of the positioning measurements to be jointly utilized for poisoning the first device; and in accordance with a determination that the LOS condition is changed, setting the indication to a second value different from the first value indicating that the first part of the positioning measurements not to be jointly utilized with the second part of the positioning measurements to estimate the location of the first device . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES TERRELL SHEDRICK whose telephone number is (571)272-8621. The examiner can normally be reached 8A-5P. 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, Matthew D Anderson can be reached at 571 272 4177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /CHARLES T SHEDRICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 2 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 3 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 4 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 5 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 6 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 7 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 8 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 9 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/686,247 Page 10 Art Unit: 2646
Prosecution Insights