Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/691,914

INDOOR POSITIONING ENABLED SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 14, 2024
Examiner
MIRZA, ADNAN M
Art Unit
3667
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Signify Holding B V
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
835 granted / 985 resolved
+32.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
1037
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 985 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority 1. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim foreign priority based on application filed in the Republic of India on 09/17/2021. Information Disclosure Statement 2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/14/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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, 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. 3. Claim(s) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huberman et al (U.S. 10,716,089) and further in view of Stanger et al (US 2012/0066035). As per claims 1,7 Huberman disclosed a method of determining position data of a mobile electronic device within a building, the method comprising: receiving, at a backend device, a communication comprising venue information from a positioning platform of the mobile electronic device, wherein the venue information comprises coarse location information for the mobile electronic device, a search radius [a method of deploying a trained neural network-based RSS fingerprint dataset for mobile device indoor navigation and positioning. The method comprises: based on RSS parameters acquired from a plurality of mobile devices acquired at a set of positions within an indoor area, accumulating the RSS parameters as a trained neural network-based RSS fingerprint dataset in a fingerprint database of the indoor area; and when a density of points represented by the set of positions having accumulated RSS parameters exceeds a deployment threshold density, deploying the RSS fingerprint dataset within a fingerprint map for mobile device navigation of the indoor area, the fingerprint map encompassing the set of positions] (col.2, lines 43-54) and identifying, via the backend device, one or more building datasets associated with the validated customer identity and based on the venue information received from the positioning platform of the mobile electronic device in the communication, wherein the one or more building datasets includes at least a building dataset corresponding to the building [a server computing system for deploying a trained neural network-based RSS fingerprint dataset for mobile device indoor navigation and positioning. The server computing system comprises a processor and a memory. The memory includes instructions executable in the processor to, based on RSS parameters acquired from a plurality of mobile devices acquired at a set of positions within an indoor area, accumulating the RSS parameters as a trained neural network-based RSS fingerprint dataset in a fingerprint database of the indoor area; and when a density of points represented by the set of positions having accumulated RSS parameters exceeds a deployment threshold density] (col. 2, lines 55-66); generating, via the backend device, an indoor positioning dataset based on the one or more identified building datasets [At step 320, processor 201 executes instructions included in RSS measured parameters module 211 to receive, from a mobile device positioned at the first location, a set of RSS measured parameters from the wireless signal source at the second location. The term RSS measured parameters as used herein is synonymous with actual RSS parameters as acquired at a mobile device having an RSS sensor device, as opposed to RSS parameters determined based on the mathematical postulated RSS model] (col 10, lines 27-34); and transmitting, via backend device, the indoor positioning dataset to the positioning platform of the mobile device [In some variations, the method may include associating a first deployment threshold with the more traveled portion; associating a second deployment threshold with the less traveled portion; and deploying a RSS fingerprint set for mobile device navigation within the more traveled portion when the first deployment threshold density exceeds a density of points of the more traveled portion.] (col. 13, lines 9-18) Examiner interpreted the deployment as transmitting; wherein the indoor position of the mobile electronic device is determined using the indoor positioning dataset received from the backend device [FIG. 8 illustrates, in an example embodiment, a method of deploying a neural network trained RSS dataset in a fingerprint map of an indoor area for mobile device navigation and positioning] (col.12, lines 49-53). However, Huberman did not explicitly disclose, “a customer license string; validating, via the backend device, a customer identity based on the customer license string received in the communication”; In the same field of endeavor Stranger disclosed, “Venue content can be returned at 2318 and stored in a content database 2320. Generally, after the application is initiated for the first time, a user is requested to accept an End User License Agreement (EULA) at 2322 and if not accepted, the application quits at 2324. Otherwise, a navigation list is loaded at 2326. Mobile device calibration can be selected at 2328 and the calibration is carried out at 2330. The location of the mobile device is then estimated at 2328 and displayed at 2334 along with location specific content and user interface and other elements of the mobile application” (Paragraph. 0051). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing was made to have incorporated Venue content can be returned at 2318 and stored in a content database 2320. Generally, after the application is initiated for the first time, a user is requested to accept an End User License Agreement (EULA) at 2322 and if not accepted, the application quits at 2324. Otherwise, a navigation list is loaded at 2326. Mobile device calibration can be selected at 2328 and the calibration is carried out at 2330. The location of the mobile device is then estimated at 2328 and displayed at 2334 along with location specific content and user interface and other elements of the mobile application as taught by Stranger in the method and system of Huberman to reduce latency by providing timely location-based information. 4. As per claim 2 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the venue information further comprises one or more local location identifiers received at the mobile electronic device from one or more beacon devices positioned within the building (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 5. As per claim 3 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the indoor position of the mobile electronic device is determined within an accuracy of 1 meter or less (Huberman, col. 5, lines 47-67). 6. As per claim 4 Huberman-Stranger disclosed further comprising: retrieving, via the mobile electronic device, coarse location information for the mobile electronic device; receiving, via the mobile electronic device, one or more local location identifiers from one or more beacon devices positioned within the building; transmitting, from the positioning platform of the mobile device (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44), the communication to the backend device via a communications network; receiving, at the mobile electronic device, the indoor positioning dataset from the backend device via the communications network; and determining, via the positioning platform of the mobile electronic device, the indoor position of the mobile electronic device based on the received indoor positioning dataset (Huberman, col. 13, lines 9-18). 7. As per claim 5 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the generating the indoor positioning dataset includes merging two or more building datasets into a super building dataset to form the indoor positioning dataset (Huberman, col. 3, lines 55-67 & col. 4, lines 1-15). 8. As per claim 6 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein merging the two or more building datasets into a super building dataset comprises: identifying two or more building datasets based on the venue information, wherein each of the two or more building datasets comprises a record of a plurality of beacon devices (Huberman, col. 3, lines 55-67 & col. 4, lines 1-15), each record comprising a stored local location identifier for each of the plurality of beacon devices and a location of each of the beacon devices within a single building; and generating the super building dataset such that the super building dataset comprises a merged record of a plurality of beacon devices, wherein the merged record comprises a stored local location identifier for each of the plurality of beacon devices and a location of each of the beacon devices within all of the two or more buildings (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 9. As per claim 8 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the venue information comprises coarse location information for the mobile electronic device, a search radius, and a customer license string (Stranger, Paragraph. 0051). Claim 8 has the same motivation as to claim 1. 10. As per claim 9 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the venue information further includes a record of one or more local location identifiers received from one or more beacon devices (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 10. As per claim 10 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the record of the one or more local location identifiers includes at least two local location identifiers received from at least two beacon devices (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 11. As per claim 11 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein each of the one or more local location identifiers is at least one of a visible coded light (VCL) identifier and a Bluetooth (BLE) identifier (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 12. As per claim 12 Huberman-Stranger disclosed further comprising: a plurality of beacon devices, each beacon device comprising a driver that emits a local location identifier associated with the beacon device (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 13. As per claim 13 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein each of building datasets identified based on the venue information comprise a record of a plurality of beacon devices, a local location identifier associated with each of the plurality of beacon devices, and a location of each of the plurality of beacon devices within a single building (Huberman, col. 4, lines 28-44). 14. As per claim 14 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the indoor positioning dataset generated by the backend device comprises the one or more identified building datasets merged into a super building dataset (Huberman, col. 3, lines 55-67 & col. 4, lines 1-15). 15. As per claim 15 Huberman-Stranger disclosed wherein the backend device further comprises instructions stored in the memory of the backend device that, when executed by the processor of the backend device, performs the following: identify two or more building datasets based on the venue information (Huberman, col. 3, lines 3-15), each of identified building datasets comprising a record of a plurality of beacon devices, a local location identifier associated with each of the plurality of beacon devices, and a location of each of the plurality of beacon devices within a single building; and generate the super building dataset such that the super building dataset comprises a merged record of a plurality of beacon devices (Huberman, col. 3, lines 55-67 & col. 4, lines 1-15). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 16. Claim 1 recites the limitation "determining position data of a mobile electronic device within a building…" in claim 1 is not clear whether it is directed (i) determining – at an unspecified location – the position of mobile device located within a building, or (ii) a determining a mobile electronic device’s position data, wherein said determining is performed within a building. Claim 1 recites the limitation “search radius” in claim 1 is not clear. Claim 1 recites the limitation “…Validating via the backend device (..) a customer identity based on the customer license string received in the venue communication…” it is not clear if/what technical effect the customer identity and its verification has with respect to the claimed method, because the remaining feature do not appear to have any relationship with/dependency upon this validation feature and its outcome, e.g. a validated customer identity. Claim 1 recites the limitation “…the indoor position of the mobile electronic device is determined using the indoor positioning dataset received from the backend device...” the indoor position” lacks a clear antecedence. Claim 1 recites the limitation “…building dataset corresponding to the building….” does not specify the contents of this dataset, thereby leaving the one ordinary skill in the art in doubt with respect to its technical significance and the technical effect of using it during e.g. generation of an indoor positioning dataset. Claim 1 recites the limitation “indoor positioning dataset” (e.g. generating, transmitting and using such dataset for indoor position determination) are unclear because the one ordinary skill in the art is left in doubt with respect to the contents and hence the technical significance of this dataset. U.S.C 112 rejection of claim 1 also applies to claim 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims 1 and 7. Conclusion 17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885. 18. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821. 19. 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 un published 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). /ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12578196
Road Recognition Method and Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576743
CHARGER SELECTION SYSTEM, CHARGER SELECTION METHOD, AND CHARGER SELECTION PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570328
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE WITH CONTINGENCY CONSIDERATION IN TRAJECTORY REALIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560931
COLLABORATIVE ORDER FULFILLMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560451
METHOD FOR POSITIONING A MAP REPRESENTATION OF AN ENVIRONMENT OF A VEHICLE IN A SEMANTIC ROAD MAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 985 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month