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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 07/21/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-30 are pending in this application. Applicant’s amendment overcomes the 101 rejection from the previously filed Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for the USC § 102 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues on pgs. 10-11 of the Remarks,
“The Office relies on paragraph [0091] of Kim as allegedly teaching "receive the at least one RS with a first received polarization in a first configuration and a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration." See Office Action, pages 7-8. While paragraph [0091] of Kim provides that "the MS analyzes the characteristic of the signal received by a cross polarization antenna pair including a vertical antenna and a horizontal antenna to check the polarization characteristic of the received signal" and, alternatively, that "the MS receives only the signal having the polarization characteristic of the transmitted signal," Kim does not teach or suggest "a first received polarization in a first configuration" and "a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration." A "cross polarization antenna pair including a vertical antenna and a horizontal antenna" identifies an antenna pair, but Kim does not disclose that "the at least one RS" is received "with a first received polarization in a first configuration and a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration"; moreover, Kim's alternative disclosure that "the MS receives only the signal having the polarization characteristic of the transmitted signal" expressly describes receiving "only" that signal, not receiving the at least one RS with the two received polarizations in the two different configurations recited in claim 1.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The vertical polarization of the reference signal from Kim can be considered the “first polarization” and “first configuration”. The horizontal polarization of the reference signal from Kim can be considered the “second polarization” and “second configuration”. Examiner cited paragraph 0091 regarding the vertical and horizontal antennas to point out the multiple polarization configurations of the reference signal, and the receiver’s ability to analyze both vertical polarization and horizontal polarization. Kim also discloses analyzing various polarization characteristics. See Kim paragraph 0013,
“Additionally or alternatively, the polarization characteristic to be compared may include a polarization angle, cross-polarization discrimination (XPD) or a polarization rotation direction”
The variety of polarization characteristics disclosed in Kim can be considered first and second polarizations with first and second configurations.
Applicant further argues on pg. 11 of the Remarks,
“The Office relies on paragraph [0098] of Kim as allegedly teaching "measure polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization." See Office Action, page 8. Paragraph [0098] of Kim, however, provides that "the MS measures the polarization characteristic of the received signal," in the singular, and, in its representative example, states that "the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component" and "compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component." Dividing "the received signal" into "a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component" after reception does not teach receiving "the at least one RS with a first received polarization in a first configuration and a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration," nor does measuring "the polarization characteristic of the received signal" teach measuring "polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization," as recited in claim 1.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As established above in paragraph 4 of this Office Action, the polarization characteristic can comprise multiple polarization components. The example of Kim paragraph 0098 further includes
“As a representative example, when the BS notifies the MS that a right-handed polarization signal is transmitted, the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component, compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component, and determines a possibility that an LOS link is established.”
Obtaining the levels and times of the polarization components are measurements. The right-handed polarization component can be considered the first received polarization with a first configuration. The left-handed polarization component can be considered the second received polarization with a second configuration. Therefore, Kim discloses measuring polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization.
Applicant further argues on pgs. 11-12 of the Remarks,
“The cited portions of Kim also do not teach the claimed sequence. The Office separately relies on paragraph [0098] for "determine a polarization used by a transmitter," paragraph [0091] for receiving the at least one RS, paragraph [0098] for measuring polarization characteristics, and paragraph [0011] for determining whether an LOS path is present; however, Kim does not disclose these features arranged in the recited sequence of "determine a polarization used by a transmitter for at least one reference signal (RS)," "receive the at least one RS with a first received polarization in a first configuration and a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration," "measure polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization," and then "determine whether the at least one RS was received in a line-of-sight (LOS) path from the transmitter based on the measured polarization characteristics and expected received polarization characteristics, wherein the expected received polarization characteristics are based on the determined polarization used by the transmitter." Instead, paragraph [0091] describes alternative operations involving either "a cross polarization antenna pair" or receiving "only the signal having the polarization characteristic of the transmitted signal," while paragraph [0098] describes dividing a single "received signal" into polarization components.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The steps of “receiving” and “measuring” polarization characteristics as discussed in paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Office Action are disclosed in Kim. It is reasonable to believe that the process steps of Kim could be performed in the same sequence as written in claim 1 to achieve the same outcome, which is determining line-of-sight signals via polarization measurements. See Kim Abstract,
“The method includes receiving information on a reference signal for positioning from a serving base station, measuring the reference signal, comparing a transmission polarization characteristic and reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal and determining whether a light of sight (LOS) link between a base station for transmitting the reference signal and the MS is present or not,”
See also Kim paragraph 0118,
“When information on the reference signal includes information on the transmission polarization characteristic of the reference signal, the MS may compare the transmission polarization characteristic with the reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal”
The “receiving information on a reference signal” of Kim can include the signal’s polarization as “transmission polarization characteristic of the reference signal”, which reads on claim 1’s “determine a polarization used by a transmitter for at least one reference signal (RS)”. As previously established, Kim measures polarization characteristics and then determines LOS link based on the transmitted polarization characteristic and the received polarization characteristic. Kim discloses the same steps as recited in the method of claim 1 and achieves the same result. Therefore, Kim discloses each limitation of claim 1.
Applicant further argues on pg. 12 of the Remarks,
“Further, paragraph [0011] of Kim states that the MS compares "a transmission polarization characteristic and reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal," while paragraph [0098] states that the MS uses "information on a difference in polarization characteristic between the transmitted signal and the received signal." Neither paragraph teaches determining whether the at least one RS was received in the LOS path "based on the measured polarization characteristics and expected received polarization characteristics," where the "measured polarization characteristics" are those "of the first received polarization and the second received polarization" and the "expected received polarization characteristics are based on the determined polarization used by the transmitter." A "transmission polarization characteristic" is not identified in Kim as "expected received polarization characteristics," and the Office has not established that the former necessarily constitutes the latter.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kim discloses that measuring polarization leads to determining LOS. See Kim Figure 10, S1020 “Measure receive polarization characteristic of reference signal” and S1040 “Determine whether LOS link is present or not”. Kim further provides an example in paragraph 0098,
“The BS notifies the MS of the transmission polarization characteristic information of the transmit antenna via higher layer signaling and the MS measures the polarization characteristic of the received signal and determines whether an LOS link is established between the BS and the MS using information on a difference in polarization characteristic between the transmitted signal and the received signal. As a representative example, when the BS notifies the MS that a right-handed polarization signal is transmitted, the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component, compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component, and determines a possibility that an LOS link is established. That is, when the signal component having the transmission polarization characteristic arrives with higher strength earlier than the signal components having different polarization characteristics, it is determined that the LOS link is established.”
Kim discloses that the difference in polarization characteristics determines if the signal was received via a LOS path. In the case of Kim, the “transmission polarization characteristic” is the “expected received polarization” of claim 1. Kim’s “transmission polarization characteristic” is the polarization used by the transmitter, which has been communicated to the receiving MS. Therefore, Kim does disclose “determine whether the at least one RS was received in a line-of-sight (LOS) path from the transmitter based on the measured polarization characteristics and expected received polarization characteristics, wherein the expected received polarization characteristics are based on the determined polarization used by the transmitter” as recited in claim 1.
For at least these reasons, Examiner is unpersuaded and maintains previous rejections corresponding to the USC § 102 rejection. Therefore, the Examiner asserts that Kim et al. (US 20150382318 A1) discloses each and every limitation of independent claim 1 based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 12, 16-18, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 20150382318 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses
An apparatus for wireless communication at a receiver (see pg. 1, paragraph 0003, “The present invention relates to a wireless communication system, and more particularly, to a position calculation method and apparatus in a wireless communication system.”), comprising:
at least one memory (see Fig. 11, memory 22 and memory 12);
at least one transceiver (see Fig. 11, RF unit 13 and 23); and
at least one processor, communicatively connected to the at least memory and the at least one transceiver (see Fig. 11, processor 11 and 21), the at least one processor configured to:
determine a polarization used by a transmitter for at least one reference signal (RS) (see pg. 9, paragraph 0098, “The BS notifies the MS [mobile station] of the transmission polarization characteristic information”; paragraph 0118, “When information on the reference signal includes information on the transmission polarization characteristic of the reference signal, the MS may compare the transmission polarization characteristic with the reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal”);
receive the at least one RS with a first received polarization in a first configuration and a second received polarization in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration (see pg. 8, paragraph 0091, “Therefore, the polarization characteristics of the transmitted signal and the received signal, that is, differences in received polarization angle, XPD and polarization rotation direction, may be compared to determine whether reception is performed via an LOS link without reflection, refraction or diffraction. That is, the MS analyzes the characteristic of the signal received by a cross polarization antenna pair including a vertical antenna and a horizontal antenna to check the polarization characteristic of the received signal. Alternatively, the MS receives only the signal having the polarization characteristic of the transmitted signal”; paragraph 0113, “Additionally or alternatively, the polarization characteristic to be compared may include a polarization angle, cross-polarization discrimination (XPD) or a polarization rotation direction”);
measure polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization (see pg. 9, paragraph 0098, “the MS measures the polarization characteristic of the received signal and determines whether an LOS link is established between the BS and the MS using information on a difference in polarization characteristic between the transmitted signal and the received signal. As a representative example, when the BS notifies the MS that a right-handed polarization signal is transmitted, the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component, compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component, and determines a possibility that an LOS link is established.”); and
determine whether the at least one RS was received in a line-of-sight (LOS) path from the transmitter based on the measured polarization characteristics and expected received polarization characteristics, wherein the expected received polarization characteristics are based on the determined polarization used by the transmitter (see pg. 1, paragraph 0011, “The method may include…comparing a transmission polarization characteristic and reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal and determining whether a light of sight (LOS) link between a base station for transmitting the reference signal and the MS is present or not, when the information on the reference signal includes information on the transmission polarization characteristic of the reference signal, and transmitting information on whether the LOS link is present or not to the serving base station”; Abstract, “The method includes receiving information on a reference signal for positioning from a serving base station, measuring the reference signal, comparing a transmission polarization characteristic and reception polarization characteristic of the measured reference signal and determining whether a light of sight (LOS) link between a base station for transmitting the reference signal and the MS is present or not,”; paragraph 0098, “The BS notifies the MS of the transmission polarization characteristic information of the transmit antenna via higher layer signaling and the MS measures the polarization characteristic of the received signal and determines whether an LOS link is established between the BS and the MS using information on a difference in polarization characteristic between the transmitted signal and the received signal. As a representative example, when the BS notifies the MS that a right-handed polarization signal is transmitted, the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component, compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component, and determines a possibility that an LOS link is established. That is, when the signal component having the transmission polarization characteristic arrives with higher strength earlier than the signal components having different polarization characteristics, it is determined that the LOS link is established.”).
Regarding claim 2, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein, to determine whether the at least one RS was received in the LOS path, the at least one processor is further configured to:
compare the measured polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the second received polarization to the expected received polarization characteristics (see pg. 9, paragraph 0098, “As a representative example, when the BS notifies the MS that a right-handed polarization signal is transmitted, the MS divides the received signal into a right-handed polarization component and a left-handed polarization component, compares the levels and times of arrival of the right-handed polarization component and the left-handed polarization component, and determines a possibility that an LOS link is established”).
Regarding claim 12, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 2, wherein, to determine whether the at least one RS was received in the LOS path, the at least one processor is further configured to:
compare a phase difference between first and second measured polarization characteristics of the first and second received polarizations to a phase difference between a first polarization characteristic and a second polarization characteristic of the expected received polarization characteristics (see pg. 8, paragraphs 0088-0089, polarization signals can have a phase difference; pg. 8, paragraph 0091, “the polarization characteristics of the transmitted signal and the received signal, that is, differences in received polarization angle, XPD and polarization rotation direction, may be compared”).
Regarding claim 16, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the polarization used by the transmitter is provided to the apparatus or is preconfigured and known to the apparatus (see pg. 9, paragraph 0098, “The BS notifies the MS [mobile station] of the transmission polarization characteristic information”).
Regarding claims 17-18 and 27, the same cited sections and rationale for claims 1-2 and 12 are applied. The only difference between claims 1-2 and 12 and claims 17-18 and 27 is that claims 1-2 and 12 refer to an apparatus while claims 17-18 and 27 refer to a method. The examiner considers Kim pg. 1, paragraph 0003, (“The present invention relates to a wireless communication system, and more particularly, to a position calculation method and apparatus in a wireless communication system.”) to show that the radar apparatus performs the radar method of claims 17-18 and 27.
Regarding claim 29, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied.
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.
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.
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 as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) 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 as of the effective filing date of the later invention 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.
Claims 3-11, 13-15, 19-28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150382318 A1) in view of Walk et al. (US 20230288517 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Walk discloses
The apparatus of claim 2, wherein, to compare the polarization characteristics, the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine if a first difference between the polarization characteristics of the first received polarization and the characteristics of the expected received polarization is less than a first threshold (see pg. 2, paragraph 0015, “determining, by the first device, that the value of a given metric, determined from the RSRP measurements of each reference signal via each resource, does not meet a specified threshold,”); and
determine if a second difference between the polarization characteristics of the second received polarization and the characteristics of the expected received polarization is less than a second threshold (see pg. 2, paragraph 0015, “determining, by the first device, that the value of a given metric, determined from the RSRP measurements of each reference signal via each resource, does not meet a specified threshold,”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Both Kim and Walk are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose reference signal polarization analysis for determining line of sight paths for signals. Kim discloses the limitations of claim 2; however, Kim fails to disclose a threshold for the difference between expected polarization and received polarization. This feature is disclosed by Walk where the measured polarization metrics can need to meet a threshold to determine if a line of sight path was used. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a standardized way to determine if the difference between expected and received signals has a significant meaning to determining a line of sight path.
Regarding claim 4, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the first threshold and the second threshold are a same threshold (see pg. 13, paragraph 0155, “In step 610, the receiver 204 determines if the channel measurement difference between the two polarizations is larger than a threshold…the threshold may be specified in a technical standard, or by the operator of the communications system. The threshold may be determined through collaboration between the devices of the communications system.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a threshold being the same for both signals for the difference between expected polarization and received polarization. This feature is disclosed by Walk where the threshold can be specified depending on the needs of the system. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a standardized way to determine if the difference between expected and received signals has a significant meaning to determining a line of sight path.
Regarding claim 5, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein, to determine that the at least one RS was received in the LOS path from the transmitter, the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine that the at least one RS was received in the LOS path from the transmitter when both the first difference is less than the first threshold and the second difference is less than the second threshold (see pg. 1, paragraph 0014, “determining, by the first device, that the value of a given metric, determined from the RSRP measurements of each reference signal on each resource, does meet a specified threshold, and based thereon, determining, by the first device, that the LOS characterization of the transmission comprises a LOS transmission.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a threshold for polarization differences. This feature is disclosed by Walk where not meeting the threshold can indicate a LOS transmission. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a standardized way to determine if the difference between expected and received signals indicates a line of sight path.
Regarding claim 6, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 5, wherein the first configuration of the first received polarization or the second configuration of the second received polarization comprises at least one of a circular polarization, a linear polarization, or an elliptical polarization (see Fig. 5, different types of polarization).
Regarding claim 7, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the first and second received polarizations are observed for a period of time that exceeds a designated period (see pg. 4, paragraph 0052, sampling time and transmission time can be determined).
Regarding claim 8, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 5, wherein the at least one RS is transmitted across different antenna ports, wherein the polarization characteristics of the first or second received polarization comprise at least one of circular polarization, elliptical polarization, or linear polarization (see pg. 19, paragraph 0220, “In another example embodiment, a reference signal of two antenna ports can be defined with one antenna port defined for horizontal polarization measurement and another defined for vertical polarization measurement.”; pg. 6, paragraph 0092, “Transmission of a different polarization orientation could be achieved in different ways such as with two antennas having a similar antenna pattern, which have polarizations orthogonal to each other, for example with one antenna-polarization parallel with the surface of earth and one perpendicular. By transmitting the same signal at the same time with different powers over both antennas, any linear polarization orientation can be radiated.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a reference signal transmitted across different antenna ports. This feature is disclosed by Walk where a signal can be transmitted from different antenna ports. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to be able to send multiple distinct signals to increase the signals available for LOS analysis.
Regarding claim 9, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the polarization characteristics of the different antenna ports varies with time in a pattern (see pg. 19, paragraph 0219, “The same sequence may be sent at two different time instances, which are known by the UE. The time instances may generally be close enough so that the channel does not substantially change.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a reference signal transmitted across different antenna ports that varies with time in a pattern. This feature is disclosed by Walk where a signal sequence can be transmitted at different time instances. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to be able to send multiple distinct signals to increase the signals available for LOS analysis.
Regarding claim 10, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the at least one RS is not received in the LOS path from the transmitter if the first difference is greater than the first threshold or the second difference is greater than the second threshold (see pg. 2, paragraph 0030, “determine a difference between a measurement of the first signal and a measurement of the second signal does not meet a specified threshold, and based thereon determine that the LOS characterization of the transmission comprises a non-LOS (NLOS) transmission”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a threshold for polarization differences. This feature is disclosed by Walk where meeting the threshold can indicate not being in a LOS transmission. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a standardized way to determine if the difference between expected and received signals indicates a line of sight path.
Regarding claim 11, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein, to determine whether the at least one RS was received in the LOS path, the at least one processor is further configured to:
estimate an angle of arrival of the at least one RS; and
determine whether the at least one RS was received in the LOS path further based on an estimated angle of arrival (see Fig. 18C; pg. 26, paragraph 0282, angle of arrival can be determined for LOS path).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose estimating angle of arrival and using that to determine LOS path for a signal. This feature is disclosed by Walk where the angle of arrival can be determined and used to determine LOS path. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have another method to determine LOS path using available parameters that are easy to measure.
Regarding claim 13, Walk further discloses
The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the at least one RS was received in the LOS path if the phase difference is less than a threshold (see pg. 1, paragraph 0014, “determining, by the first device, that the value of a given metric, determined from the RSRP measurements of each reference signal on each resource, does meet a specified threshold, and based thereon, determining, by the first device, that the LOS characterization of the transmission comprises a LOS transmission.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim fails to disclose a threshold for polarization differences. This feature is disclosed by Walk where not meeting the threshold can indicate a LOS transmission. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a standardized way to determine if the difference between expected and received signals indicates a line of sight path.
Regarding claim 14, Kim further discloses
The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the polarization characteristics of the first received polarization or the second received polarization comprise an amplitude and a phase (see pg. 9, paragraph 0098, signal strength can be examined).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses
The apparatus of claim 14, wherein at least one of the amplitude or the phase of the first received polarization or the second received polarization is compared to the characteristics of the expected received polarization based on the determined polarization used by the transmitter (see pg. 8, paragraphs 0088-0089, polarization signals can have a phase difference; pg. 8, paragraph 0091, “the polarization characteristics of the transmitted signal and the received signal, that is, differences in received polarization angle, XPD and polarization rotation direction, may be compared”).
Regarding claims 19-26 and 28, the same cited sections and rationale for claims 3-15 are applied. The only difference between claims 3-15 and claims 19-26 and 28 is that claims 3-15 refer to an apparatus while claims 19-26 and 28 refer to a method. The examiner considers Kim pg. 1, paragraph 0003, (“The present invention relates to a wireless communication system, and more particularly, to a position calculation method and apparatus in a wireless communication system.”) to show that the radar apparatus performs the radar method of claims 19-26 and 28.
Regarding claim 30, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied. Walk further discloses
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer executable code at a receiver, the code when executed by a processor causes the processor to (see pg. 4, paragraph 0079, “The functions or algorithms described herein may be implemented in software in one example embodiment. The software may consist of computer executable instructions stored on computer readable media or computer readable storage device such as one or more non-transitory memories or other type of hardware based storage devices, either local or networked.”):
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Walk into the invention of Kim. Kim discloses the majority of claim 30 as referenced in the claim 1 rejection; however, Kim fails to disclose a computer-readable medium storing code. This feature is disclosed by Walk where the method can be implemented in software stored on computer readable media. The combination of Kim and Walk would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to functionally and conveniently implement the communication method onto existing computer infrastructure.
Additional Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure and may be found on the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
Park et al. (US 20230268981 A1); Disclosed, in various embodiments, are a method by which a non-terrestrial network (NTN) transmits a downlink signal on the basis of polarization information in a wireless communication system, and an apparatus for same. The method comprises the steps of generating a sequence related to the downlink signal; and transmitting the downlink signal including the sequence, wherein the sequence is sequence initialized on the basis of a parameter related to the polarization information.
Calcev et al. (US 20210239783 A1); A method performed by a first device includes communicating, with a second device, a LOS determination request including a dual polarization procedure indicator indicating a dual polarization procedure is used in LOS characterization of a transmission between the first device and the second device, measuring a first signal on a first resource of a channel, and measuring a second signal on a second resource of the channel, with the first and second signals comprising a single bit sequence with orthogonal polarizations and are multiplexed in a frequency domain or a code domain.
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 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 ISABELLA A EDRADA whose telephone number is (571)272-4859. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9am-5pm ET.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/ISABELLA AMEYALI EDRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
