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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/22/26 pending claims 19-31 and 33-38 subject to the Restriction/Election Requirement mailed on May 25, 2026 has been considered. The Examiner required a restriction to one of the groups of claims. Applicant has elects Group I, corresponding to claims 19-30 and 33-37, without traverse. Accordingly, Applicant has withdrawn claims 31 and 38. Applicant reserves the right to pursue any of claims 31 and 38 in a divisional application or to request rejoinder of any of claims 31 and 38 at later stage of prosecution of the present Application. See consideration of elected claims 19-30 and 33-37 below.
Claim Objections
Claims 19-30 and 33-38 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 19 and 25 define the parameter WD. Examiner suggest changing it to “Wireless device (WD)- - ‘Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 19-24 and 33-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 19 and 25 recite "comprising --- at least one of: change a mapping between multiple input multiple output, MIMO, streams and antennas of the WD; for each antenna of the WD, apply a different code division multiplex, CDM, time offset to a reference signal transmitted by the antenna of the WD; add inter-symbol clock jitter to a clock signal of the WD; change a phase center of at least one antenna port of the WD; and change a polarization of at least one antenna of the WD”. The claimed “and” suggest at least one of the limitations in the body of the claim. It is unclear what “and” means. For examination purposes, the limitations are interpreted to be comprising --- at least one of: change a mapping between multiple input multiple output, MIMO, streams and antennas of the WD; for each antenna of the WD, apply a different code division multiplex, CDM, time offset to a reference signal transmitted by the antenna of the WD; add inter-symbol clock jitter to a clock signal of the WD; change a phase center of at least one antenna port of the WD; OR change a polarization of at least one antenna of the WD”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 19,20, 25,26 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NORD LARS (WO2023186580 A1) in view of Kaliola et al (EP2613168A1)
With regards to claim 19, NORD LARS discloses in fig. 1, a method in a WD for determination of at least one of relative orientation and relative position of the WD (A method is disclosed, performed by a service Application Programming Interface, API, controlling node, for enabling a first wireless device to determine a relative position between a plurality of second wireless devices based on a positioning function of a core network.), the method comprising: The method comprises, upon the first wireless device being authorized to determine the relative position of the plurality of second wireless devices, performing, based on the positioning function and the message identifying the plurality of second wireless devices, a positioning procedure for determining the relative position of the plurality of second wireless devices. The method comprises sending, to the first wireless device, using the service API for positioning of wireless devices, the relative position of the plurality of second wireless devices);
NORD LARS discloses all of the subject matter discussed above, but is not explicit about disabling and at least causing an error in a determination of spatial coordinates of antennas of the WD by configuring the WD to perform at least one of the following: change a mapping between multiple input multiple output, MIMO, streams and antennas of the WD.
However, Kaliola et al teaches wireless communication device (WCD) in figs. 6, 7 while executing a direction of arrival (DoA) estimates. Sensor information may be used to affect the behavior of the device while performing the DoA estimation. Antenna control switching shown in fig. 7. Claim 22, discloses disabling direction of arrival estimates determination when the wireless communication is not in an acceptable orientation and/or is moving too fast to provide an accurate direction of arrival estimate- - - “Also see fig. 12, block 1232.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of NORD LARS as taught byKaliola et al to arrive at the claimed invention, wherein disabling is disclosed with a reasonable expectation of success, thus improving the overall performance and power management in a wireless communication device performing a direction of arrival estimation (see Kaliola et al, [0001]).
With regards to claim 25, A WD configured to disable a determination of at least one of relative orientation and relative position of the WD, the WD comprising processing (see NORD LARS claim 20, discloses a processing circuitry) circuitry configured to: perform at least one of the following: change a mapping between multiple input multiple output, MIMO, streams and antennas of the WD; for each antenna of the WD, apply a different code division multiplex, CDM, time offset to a reference signal transmitted by the antenna of the WD; add inter-symbol clock jitter to a clock signal of the WD; change a phase center of at least one antenna of the WD; and change a polarization of at least one antenna of the WD.( claim 25 recites similar limitations as in claim 19 above, see rejection above)
With regards to claims 20, 26 and 33, The method of Claim 19, further comprising configuring the WD to change the mapping between MIMO streams and antennas periodically (Kaliola et al fig. 3, different range of communications, fig. 6, antenna control switching) .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-24, 27-30 and 34-37 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the prior arts cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach wherein adding inter-symbol clock jitter to a clock signal of the WD includes adding a different amount of jitter to a clock signal of the clock of the WD for each antenna of a plurality of antennas of the WD.as applied in claim 25 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kato(US 202000598889) discloses orientation measurement unit in abstract
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELENE E TAYONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1675. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/HELENE E TAYONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631 June 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights