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
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 7/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejection (Ding et al. (US 2015/0127733 A1)).
Shan does not explicitly disclose, however Ding discloses wherein the association information of the neighbor UE (see [0319] “peers, association information” or regarding peers association “includes proximity related information including geolocation information and/or relative location information” in [0182]) comprises one or more of the following information:
measurement information of the neighbor UE, wherein the measurement information of the neighbor UE comprises reference signal time difference (RSTD), reference signal receiving power (RSRP), transmit-receive time difference; or location information of the neighbor UE (see peers and location information [0182], /see or conditional required by claim language/);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Ding with that Shan. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without the second through eight messages, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). Claim 7 includes only a ninth message without mention of prerequisite second through eight messages. This is critical and essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without the second through eight messages, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). Claim 7 includes only a ninth message without mention of prerequisite second through eight messages. This is critical and essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7, 8-10, 11-12, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 2021/0368581 A1) in view of Enstrom et al. (US 2021/0341562 A1) in view of Ding et al (US 2015/0127733 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shan discloses assisted positioning method (see [0021], ProSe -proximity services for directly exchange communication for UEs 101 and 102), comprising:
transmitting, by a target user equipment (UE) (see ProSe information and exchange that would imply transmitting), a first message to an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see abstract, “transmission to an AMF ” and/or “to the AMF” [0164]), wherein the first message comprises association information of a neighbor UE for the target UE ((see association information of remote UE in [0166]) as part of capability sent to the AMF [0164]);
Shan does not explicitly disclose, however Ding discloses wherein the association information of the neighbor UE (see [0319] “peers, association information” or regarding peers association “includes proximity related information including geolocation information and/or relative location information” in [0182]) comprises one or more of the following information:
measurement information of the neighbor UE, wherein the measurement information of the neighbor UE comprises reference signal time difference (RSTD), reference signal receiving power (RSRP), transmit-receive time difference; or location information of the neighbor UE (see peers and location information [0182], /see or conditional required by claim language/);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Ding with that Shan. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
Regarding claim 7, Shan discloses an assisted positioning method, comprising: receiving, by a location management function (LMF) (see location management [0071]), a ninth message, wherein the ninth message comprises association information of a neighbor user equipment (UE) for a target UE (see message [0101]).
Regarding claim 11, Shan discloses target user equipment (UE), comprising a memory, a transceiver, and a processor (see processor, abstract); wherein the memory (see memory [0085]) is configured for storing a computer program; the transceiver (see transceiver claim 10) is configured for transmitting and receiving data under control of the processor; and the processor is configured for reading the computer program in the memory and performing the following operations:
transmitting a first message to an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see abstract, “transmission to an AMF ” and/or “to the AMF” [0164]), wherein the first message comprises association information of a neighbor UE for the target UE (see association information of remote UE in [0166]) as part of capability sent to the AMF [0164]);
Shan does not explicitly disclose, however Ding discloses wherein the association information of the neighbor UE (see [0319] “peers, association information” or regarding peers association “includes proximity related information including geolocation information and/or relative location information” in [0182]) comprises one or more of the following information:
measurement information of the neighbor UE, wherein the measurement information of the neighbor UE comprises reference signal time difference (RSTD), reference signal receiving power (RSRP), transmit-receive time difference; or location information of the neighbor UE (see peers and location information [0182], /see or conditional required by claim language/);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Ding with that Shan. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
Regarding claims 2 & 12, Shan discloses the method of claim 1 and UE of claim 11, wherein before transmitting, by the target UE, the first message to the AMF, the method further comprises: receiving, by the target UE, a second message transmitted from the AMF (see [0131], “the AMF further reports ”), wherein the second message is configured for requesting the association information of the neighbor UE; and obtaining, by the target UE, the association information of the neighbor UE (see request message [0101]).
Regarding claim 8, Shan discloses the method of claim 7, wherein before receiving, by the LMF, the ninth message, the method further comprises: transmitting, by the LMF, a tenth message, wherein the tenth message is configured for instructing the target UE to transmit the association information of the neighbor UE (see fig. 5, communication transit between nodes).
Regarding claim 9, Shan discloses the method of claim 7, wherein after receiving, by the LMF, the
ninth message, the method further comprises:
obtaining, by the LMF, a positioning result of the target UE based on the
association information of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A); and
transmitting, by the LMF, the positioning result of the target UE (see ProSe [0167]).
Regarding claim 10, Shan discloses the method of claim 9, wherein obtaining, by the LMF, the
positioning result of the target UE based on the association information of the neighbor UE
comprises:
initiating, by the LMF, a positioning procedure for the neighbor UE based on the
association information of the neighbor UE to obtain a positioning result of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A); and
determining, by the LMF, the positioning result of the target UE based on the
positioning result of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 17, Shan discloses the location management function (LMF), comprising a
memory, a transceiver, and a processor; wherein the memory is usedis configured for storing a computer program; the transceiver is used is configured for transmitting and receiving data under control of the processor (see processor [0175]); and the processor is used is configured for reading the computer program in the memory and performing the method of claim 7 (see computer program [0092], program code [0069]).
Regarding claim 18, Shan discloses the method of claim 17, wherein before receiving the
ninth message, the processor further performs the following operations:
transmitting a tenth message, wherein the tenth message is configured for
instructing the target UE to transmit the association information of the neighbor UE (see capability information [0101]).
Regarding claim 19, Shan discloses the method of claim 17, wherein after receiving the ninth message,
the processor further performs the following operations:
obtaining a positioning result of the target UE based on the association
information of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A); and
transmitting the positioning result of the target UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 20, Shan discloses the method of claim 19, wherein obtaining the positioning result of
the target UE based on the association information of the neighbor UE comprises:
initiating a positioning procedure for the neighbor UE based on the association
information of the neighbor UE to obtain a positioning result of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A); and
determining the positioning result of the target UE based on the positioning result
of the neighbor UE (see ProSe [0167], regarding UE-to-UE, where on is neighbor and other is target, fig. 1A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan in view of Li et al. (US 2016/0029424 A1).
Regarding 6 & 16, Shan discloses the method of claim 1 and UE of claim 11,
Shan does not specifically disclose however wherein the association information of the neighbor UE comprises one or more of the following information: measurement information of the neighbor UE (see [0026] measurement regarding “interface for device-to-device”); measurement information of an interface between the neighbor UE and the target UE (see [0026] measurement regarding “interface for device-to-device”); or location information of the neighbor UE;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Shan with that of Li. Doing so would conform to well-known techniques in the field of invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 13-15 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 K. WILFORD SHAHEED whose telephone number is (469) 295-9175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am-6pm; CST; ALT Friday. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. The examiner’s Supervisor, Jinsong Hu, can be reached at (571)272-3965, where attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KHALID W SHAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights