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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on July 9, 2024 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Preliminary Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on July 9, 2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment also filed on July 9, 2024. Claims 1-30 are still pending in the present application.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 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 1, 7, 9-10, 12-13, 15-16, 16, 21, 23-24, 27-28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1).
Consider claim 1, Wachter et al. disclose an apparatus for wireless communication at a first user equipment (UE) (see Figure 2, the SUPL Enabled Terminal (SET) 12), comprising:
a memory (see Figure 2, the memory 32);
at least one transceiver (see Figure 2, the transceiver 36); and
at least one processor communicatively connected to the memory and the at least one transceiver, the at least one processor configured to (see Figure 2, the processor 30 “is communicatively coupled to the memory 32 and the transceiver 36 and configured to perform a variety of functions, e.g., in accordance with the software 34” (see paragraph 0045)):
transmit, to at least one of a second UE, a base station, or a network entity, a plurality of capability sets associated with UE positioning processing, the plurality of capability sets including at least a first capability set corresponding to a first level of the UE positioning processing and a second capability set corresponding to a second level of the UE positioning processing, the first level being different from the second level (see Figure 4, “If the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that SET capabilities will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message may be included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 by SET 12 (e.g. may be embedded in a SUPL POS message which may itself be carried in the SUPL POS INIT message) to convey the SET 12 capabilities (e.g. positioning protocol capabilities) to H-SLP 16. Similarly, if the posmethod parameter or some other parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that positioning measurements (e.g. of base stations and/or access points in RAN 13) will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 (e.g. carried in a SUPL POS message embedded in the SUPL POS INIT) may include positioning measurements obtained by SET 12. Transfer of SET capabilities and/or positioning measurements in the positioning protocol layer may then be used instead of transfer in the ULP layer” (see paragraph 0058). In the latter case, “if the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter at stage 118 indicates that SET 12 capabilities are to be transferred to H-SLP 16 using the positioning protocol layer, the SET 12 (e.g. the processor 30) may be configured to not include the SET capabilities in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 120 or may be configured to include the SET capabilities containing dummy or default information” (see paragraph 0070). “Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077). Periodic location determination according to the call flow 70 necessitates a plurality of SUPL POS INIT messages comprising SET capabilities as cited previously); and
However, Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein the apparatus is configured to transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose an apparatus configured to transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning (see Figure 1, “flexible UE capability information transfer may then be used to set capability for the UE 101 within the wireless network system 100. The UE 101 is able to indicate during a connection setup procedure what temporary operating mode the UE 101 is selected to operate in. This indication is communicated to a network and the MME 160 to update device operation within the system 100” (see paragraph 0024), where the system 100 comprises eNB 150 which acts as a base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify
the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. to transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow the second UE, base station, or network entity to make an informed selection of one of the capability sets prior to the UE positioning process.
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 1 above , Wachter et al., as modified by Vanaman et al., further disclose wherein the indication is transmitted periodically or updated periodically (“Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077)).
Consider claim 9, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al., as modified by Vanaman et al., further disclose wherein the first capability set and the second capability set are transmitted at a different time (refer to the reasoning in claim 1, the different capability sets are transmitted in separate SUPL POS INIT messages and thusly at different times (see paragraph 0077)).
Consider claim 10, and as applied to claim 9 above, Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a third capability set corresponding to a third level of the UE positioning processing, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a third capability set, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level (see Figure 1, the “Low data rate mode (LDRM) 104 comprises an operating mode of UE 101 for power saving operations and extended battery life with limited operations” (see paragraph 0022), and is separate from the regular and low power operating modes. Referring to Figure 2, operation 206 comprises transmitting a selected operating mode to the MME).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a third capability set, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow greater flexibility to optimally configure communications to match the capabilities of the apparatus.
Consider claim 12, and as applied to claim 1 above , Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time (“the temporary operating modes…identify different subsets of UE 101 capabilities to a network, where the temporary operating modes may be switched so that a single UE can operate in a different mode at different times with different subsets of the UE's capabilities active” (see paragraph 0027)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to
ensure the first UE and second UE/base station/network function carry out UE positioning
according to the desired capability set indicated by the first UE.
Consider claim 13, and as applied to claim 1 above , Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a notification to deactivate the plurality of capability sets.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a notification to deactivate the plurality of capability sets (“the operating mode may be changed at the initiation of the UE 101, the MME 160, or any other network element authorized to set the operating mode of the UE 101” (see paragraph 0027). In operation, each of the capability sets may be deactivated via indication by the listed elements).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, a notification to deactivate the plurality of capability sets as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to conserve resources when not actively carrying out positioning.
Consider claim 15, Wachter et al. disclose a method comprising:
transmitting, to at least one of a second UE, a base station, or a network entity, a plurality of capability sets associated with UE positioning processing, the plurality of capability sets including at least a first capability set corresponding to a first level of the UE positioning processing and a second capability set corresponding to a second level of the UE positioning processing, the first level being different from the second level (see Figure 4, “If the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that SET capabilities will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message may be included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 by SET 12 (e.g. may be embedded in a SUPL POS message which may itself be carried in the SUPL POS INIT message) to convey the SET 12 capabilities (e.g. positioning protocol capabilities) to H-SLP 16. Similarly, if the posmethod parameter or some other parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that positioning measurements (e.g. of base stations and/or access points in RAN 13) will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 (e.g. carried in a SUPL POS message embedded in the SUPL POS INIT) may include positioning measurements obtained by SET 12. Transfer of SET capabilities and/or positioning measurements in the positioning protocol layer may then be used instead of transfer in the ULP layer” (see paragraph 0058). In the latter case, “if the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter at stage 118 indicates that SET 12 capabilities are to be transferred to H-SLP 16 using the positioning protocol layer, the SET 12 (e.g. the processor 30) may be configured to not include the SET capabilities in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 120 or may be configured to include the SET capabilities containing dummy or default information” (see paragraph 0070). “Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077). Periodic location determination according to the call flow 70 necessitates a plurality of SUPL POS INIT messages comprising SET capabilities as cited previously).
However, Wachter et al. fail to disclose transmitting, to the at least one of the second UE,
the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability
sets for UE positioning.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose transmitting, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning (see Figure 1, “flexible UE capability information transfer may then be used to set capability for the UE 101 within the wireless network system 100. The UE 101 is able to indicate during a connection setup procedure what temporary operating mode the UE 101 is selected to operate in. This indication is communicated to a network and the MME 160 to update device operation within the system 100” (see paragraph 0024), where the system 100 comprises eNB 150 which acts as a base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method disclosed by Wachter et al. to transmit, to the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow the second UE, base station, or network entity to make an informed selection of one of the capability sets prior to the UE positioning process.
Consider claim 16, Wachter et al. disclose an apparatus for wireless communication at a communication entity (see Figure 3, the Home SUPL Location Platform (H-SLP) 16), comprising:
a memory (see Figure 3, the memory 62);
at least one transceiver (see Figure 3, the transceiver 66); and
at least one processor communicatively connected to the memory and the at least one
transceiver, the at least one processor configured to (see Figure 3, the processor 60 “is communicatively coupled to the memory 62 and the transceiver 66 and configured to perform a variety of functions, e.g., in accordance with the software 64” (see paragraph 0047):
receive, from a user equipment (UE), a plurality of capability sets associated with UE positioning processing, the plurality of capability sets including at least a first capability set corresponding to a first level of the UE positioning processing and a second capability set corresponding to a second level of the UE positioning processing, the first level being different from the second level (see Figure 4, “If the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that SET capabilities will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message may be included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 by SET 12 (e.g. may be embedded in a SUPL POS message which may itself be carried in the SUPL POS INIT message) to convey the SET 12 capabilities (e.g. positioning protocol capabilities) to H-SLP 16. Similarly, if the posmethod parameter or some other parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that positioning measurements (e.g. of base stations and/or access points in RAN 13) will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 (e.g. carried in a SUPL POS message embedded in the SUPL POS INIT) may include positioning measurements obtained by SET 12. Transfer of SET capabilities and/or positioning measurements in the positioning protocol layer may then be used instead of transfer in the ULP layer” (see paragraph 0058). In the latter case, “if the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter at stage 118 indicates that SET 12 capabilities are to be transferred to H-SLP 16 using the positioning protocol layer, the SET 12 (e.g. the processor 30) may be configured to not include the SET capabilities in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 120 or may be configured to include the SET capabilities containing dummy or default information” (see paragraph 0070). “Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077). Periodic location determination according to the call flow 70 necessitates a plurality of SUPL POS INIT messages comprising SET capabilities as cited previously).
However, Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein apparatus is configured to the receive, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose an apparatus configured to receive, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning (see Figure 1, “flexible UE capability information transfer may then be used to set capability for the UE 101 within the wireless network system 100. The UE 101 is able to indicate during a connection setup procedure what temporary operating mode the UE 101 is selected to operate in. This indication is communicated to a network and the MME 160 to update device operation within the system 100” (see paragraph 0024), where the system 100 comprises eNB 150 which acts as a base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. to receive, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow the apparatus to make an informed selection of one of the capability sets prior to the UE
positioning process.
Consider claim 21, and as applied to claim 16 above , Wachter et al., as modified by Vanaman et al., further disclose wherein the indication is received periodically (“Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077)).
Consider claim 23, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al., as modified by Vanaman et al., further disclose wherein the first capability set and the second capability set are received at a different time (refer to the reasoning in claim 16, the different capability sets are transmitted in separate SUPL POS INIT messages and thusly at different times (see paragraph 0077)).
Consider claim 24, and as applied to claim 23 above, Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a third capability set corresponding to a third level of the UE positioning processing, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a third capability set corresponding to a third level of the UE positioning processing, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level (see Figure 1, the “Low data rate mode (LDRM) 104 comprises an operating mode of UE 101 for power saving operations and extended battery life with limited operations” (see paragraph 0022), and is separate from the regular and low power operating modes. Referring to Figure 2, operation 206 comprises transmitting a selected operating mode to
the MME).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify
the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a third capability set corresponding to a third level of the UE positioning processing, wherein the third level is different from the first level and the second level as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow greater flexibility to optimally configure communications to match the capabilities of the UE.
Consider claim 27, and as applied to claim 16 above , Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time (“the temporary operating modes…identify different subsets of UE 101 capabilities to a network, where the temporary operating modes may be switched so that a single UE can operate in a different mode at different times with different subsets of the UE's capabilities active” (see paragraph 0027)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that no more than one capability set of the plurality of capability sets is to be activated at a time as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to ensure the first UE and second UE/base station/network function carry out UE positioning according to the desired capability set indicated by the first UE.
Consider claim 28, and as applied to claim 16 above , Wachter et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a notification to
deactivate the plurality of capability sets.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose wherein the at least one processor
is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a notification to deactivate the plurality of capability sets (“the operating mode may be changed at the initiation of the UE 101, the MME 160, or any other network element authorized to set the operating mode of the UE 101” (see paragraph 0027). In operation, each of the capability sets may be deactivated via indication by the listed elements).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. such that the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the UE, a notification to deactivate the plurality of capability sets as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to conserve resources when not actively carrying out positioning.
Consider claim 30, Wachter et al. disclose a method of wireless communication at a communication entity, comprising receiving, from a user equipment (UE), a plurality of capability sets associated with UE positioning processing, the plurality of capability sets including at least a first capability set corresponding to a first level of the UE positioning processing and a second capability set corresponding to a second level of the UE positioning processing, the first level being different from the second level (see Figure 4, “If the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that SET capabilities will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message may be included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 by SET 12 (e.g. may be embedded in a SUPL POS message which may itself be carried in the SUPL POS INIT message) to convey the SET 12 capabilities (e.g. positioning protocol capabilities) to H-SLP 16. Similarly, if the posmethod parameter or some other parameter received at stage 76 in the SUPL INIT message indicates that positioning measurements (e.g. of base stations and/or access points in RAN 13) will be transferred in the positioning protocol layer, at least one positioning protocol message included in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 80 (e.g. carried in a SUPL POS message embedded in the SUPL POS INIT) may include positioning measurements obtained by SET 12. Transfer of SET capabilities and/or positioning measurements in the positioning protocol layer may then be used instead of transfer in the ULP layer” (see paragraph 0058). In the latter case, “if the positioning protocol indicator in the posmethod parameter at stage 118 indicates that SET 12 capabilities are to be transferred to H-SLP 16 using the positioning protocol layer, the SET 12 (e.g. the processor 30) may be configured to not include the SET capabilities in the SUPL POS INIT message at stage 120 or may be configured to include the SET capabilities containing dummy or default information” (see paragraph 0070). “Triggered or scheduled (e.g., periodic) location determination may also be established in a network initiated SUPL procedure similar that for the call flow 70 shown in FIG. 4” (see paragraph 0077). Periodic location determination according to the call flow 70 necessitates a plurality of SUPL POS INIT messages comprising SET capabilities as cited previously).
However, Wachter et al. fail to disclose receiving, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning.
In the same field of endeavor, Vamanan et al. disclose receiving, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning (see Figure 1, “flexible UE capability information transfer may then be used to set capability for the UE 101 within the wireless network system 100. The UE 101 is able to indicate during a connection setup procedure what temporary operating mode the UE 101 is selected to operate in. This indication is communicated to a network and the MME 160 to update device operation within the system 100” (see paragraph 0024), where the system 100 comprises eNB 150 which acts as a base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify
the method disclosed by Wachter et al. to receive, from the UE, an indication to activate one of the plurality of capability sets for UE positioning as taught by Vamanan et al. in order to allow the second UE, base station, or network entity to make an informed selection of one of the capability sets prior to the UE positioning process.
Claims 2-3, 11, 17-18. 20, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) and further in view of Qualcomm (“LPP impacts for UE positioning capability storage”).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. further disclose an apparatus wherein the plurality of capability sets is transmitted to the network entity (see Figure 4 in Wachter et al., the target SET transmits the SUPL POS INIT message to the H-SLP via network entity 14, shown in Figure 1).
However, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the network entity is an access and mobility management function (AMF).
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the network entity is an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see Figure 1, an AMF is used in UE
positioning communications between a UE and LMF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify
the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. to employ an AMF as the network entity as taught by Qualcomm in order to align the apparatus with existing 5G
architecture.
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 2 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein one or more of the plurality of capability sets are transmitted to the AMF via the base station, or wherein the indication is transmitted to the AMF via the base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein one or more of the plurality of capability sets are transmitted to the AMF via the base station, or wherein the indication is transmitted to the AMF via the base station (see Figure 1, step 3B. The “LPP Provide Capabilities” transmission is passed to the AMF via the NG-RAN).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. to transmit one or more of the plurality of capability sets to the AMF via the base station as taught by Qualcomm in order to allow the UE to communicate with the AMF using existing signal infrastructure.
Consider claim 11, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is stored at the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored, such that the capability set is removed from the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity in response to the timer expiring.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the plurality of capability
sets is stored at the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored, such that the capability set is removed from the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity in response to the timer expiring (“an ‘expiration time’ could be added to the ‘Variability Indicator’ indicating for how long the provided positioning capabilities are stable… An ‘expiration time’ should normally only be needed in the case the provided capabilities are stable, because only in this case an AMF may store the capabilities when received at Step 4 in Figure 1 for later use at Step 2. When the positioning capabilities are variable (non-stable), a LMF would normally not provide them for storage to an AMF” (see Page 4, paragraph 3). Interpretably, this indicates that following the end of the expiration time the capabilities may no longer be stored in the AMF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that the plurality of capability sets is stored at the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored, such that the capability set is removed from the at least one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity in response to the timer expiring as taught by Qualcomm in order to reduce storage space requirements by removing capability sets which are no longer useful.
Consider claim 17, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein one or more of the plurality of capability sets are received from the UE via a base station, or wherein the indication is received from the UE via the base
station.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein one or more of the plurality
of capability sets are received from the UE via a base station, or wherein the indication is received from the UE via the base station (see Figure 1, step 3B. The “LPP Provide Capabilities”
transmission is passed to the AMF via the NG-RAN).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that one or more of the plurality of capability sets are received from the UE via a base station, or wherein the indication is received from the UE via the base station as taught by Qualcomm in order to allow the apparatus to communicate with the UE using existing signal infrastructure.
Consider claim 18, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the communication entity is an access and mobility management function (AMF), a sidelink UE, a base station, or a location management function (LMF).
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the communication entity is an access and mobility management function (AMF), a sidelink UE, a base station, or a location management function (LMF) (see Figure 1, an AMF is used in UE positioning communications between a UE and LMF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. to employ an AMF as the communication entity as taught by Qualcomm in order to align the apparatus with existing 5G architecture.
Consider claim 20, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by
Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to a location management function (LMF), the plurality of capability sets or one of the plurality of capability sets activated by the UE for a UE positioning session associated with the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein is further configured to:
transmit, to a location management function (LMF), the plurality of capability sets or one of the plurality of capability sets activated by the UE for a UE positioning session associated with the UE (see Figure 1, step 2 may comprise the AMF transmitting UE positioning capabilities with the Nlmf_Location_DetermineLocation Request message (see section 1)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. to transmit, to a location management function (LMF), the plurality of capability sets or one of the plurality of capability sets activated by the UE for a UE positioning session associated with the UE as taught by Qualcomm in order to provide the LMF information pertinent to the positioning session.
Consider claim 25, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is stored at the communication entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the plurality of capability sets is stored at the communication entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored (“an ‘expiration time’ could be added to the ‘Variability Indicator’ indicating for how long the provided positioning capabilities are stable… An ‘expiration time’ should normally only be needed in the case the provided capabilities are stable, because only in this case an AMF may store the capabilities when received at Step 4 in Figure 1 for later use at Step 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that wherein the plurality of capability sets is stored at the communication entity, each of the plurality of capability sets being associated with a timer that indicates a time in which a capability set is to be stored as taught by Qualcomm in order to reduce storage space requirements by removing capability sets which are no longer useful.
Consider claim 26, and as applied to claim 25 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: remove the capability set from the communication entity in response to the timer expiring.
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: remove the capability set from the communication entity in response to the timer expiring (“When the positioning capabilities are variable (non-stable), a LMF would normally not provide them for storage to an AMF” (see Page 4, paragraph 3). Interpretably, this indicates that following the end of the expiration time the capabilities may no longer be stored in the AMF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that the at least one processor is further configured to: remove the capability set from the communication entity in response to the timer expiring as taught by Qualcomm in order to reduce storage space requirements by removing capability sets which are no longer useful.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) further in view of Qualcomm (“LPP impacts for UE positioning capability storage”) and further in view of Sankar (US 20180132223 A1).
Consider claim 4, and as applied to claim 2 above, the combination of Wachter et al., Vamanan et al., and Qualcomm fails to disclose wherein the indication is transmitted via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), or an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE).
In the same field of endeavor, Sankar et al. disclose wherein the indication is transmitted via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), or an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE) (see Figure 1, “communications component 150 can transmit the mid-amble position indication 152 or the UE capability information 154 using static, semi-static, or dynamic signaling (e.g., in UCI, using RRC signaling, etc.)” (see paragraph 0067)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the indication is transmitted via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), or an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE) as taught by Manolakos et al. in order to align the apparatus with 5G communications standards.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) further in view of Qualcomm (“LPP impacts for UE positioning capability storage”) and further in view of Manolakos et al. (WO 2021188220 A1).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al. as modified by
Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is transmitted to the at least
one of the second UE, the base station, or the network entity, the network entity being a location management function (LMF).
In the same field of endeavor, Qualcomm discloses wherein the network entity is a location management function (LMF) (see Figure 1)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. to employ an LMF as the network entity as taught by Qualcomm in order to align the apparatus with existing 5G architecture.
However, the combination of Wachter et al., Vamanan et al., and Qualcomm fails to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is associated with sidelink (SL) UE positioning processing, and wherein the indication is transmitted via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE).
In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos et al. disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is associated with sidelink (SL) UE positioning processing, and wherein the indication is transmitted via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE) (see Figure 3, “the UE 302 may attempt to establish a unicast connection over a sidelink with the UE 304, which may be a V2X sidelink between the UE 302 and UE 304” (see paragraph 0072). “UE 304 may create a service announcement (e.g., a service capability message) to transmit over a cellular network (e.g., cV2X) to assist the sidelink connection establishment…the service announcement transmitted by UE 304 and other nearby UEs (e.g., a discovery signal) may be an upper layer signal and broadcasted (e.g., in an NR sidelink broadcast). In some cases, the UE 304 may include one or more parameters for itself in the service announcement, including connection parameters and/or capabilities it possesses” (see paragraph 0074)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the plurality of capability sets is associated with sidelink (SL) UE positioning processing, and wherein the indication is transmitted via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE) as taught by Manolakos et al. in order to allow the apparatus to use sidelink-based UE positioning.
Consider claim 6, and as applied to claim 5 above, the combination of Wachter et al., Vamanan et al., and Qualcomm fails to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is broadcasted or groupcasted to a plurality of sidelink devices including the second UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos et al. disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is broadcasted or groupcasted to a plurality of sidelink devices including the second UE (“UE 304 may create a service announcement (e.g., a service capability message) to transmit over a cellular network (e.g., cV2X) to assist the sidelink connection establishment…the service announcement transmitted by UE 304 and other nearby UEs (e.g., a discovery signal) may be an upper layer signal and broadcasted (e.g., in an NR sidelink broadcast). In some cases, the UE 304 may include one or more parameters for itself in the service announcement, including connection parameters and/or capabilities it possesses” (see paragraph 0074). Given the indicated plurality of UEs, it is implied that these broadcasts may be directed to a plurality of sidelink devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the plurality of capability sets is broadcasted or groupcasted to a plurality of sidelink devices including the second UE as disclosed by Manolakos et al. in order to allow to the apparatus to use sidelink-based UE positioning with greater accuracy.
Claims 8 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) and further in view of ETSI (“ETSI TS 136 355 V11.1.0”).
Consider claim 8, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is transmitted at a same time.
In the same field of endeavor, ETSI discloses wherein the plurality of capability sets is transmitted at a same time (see Section 5.1.3 “Reception of LPP Request Capabilities”, the target device generates a ProvideCapabilities message wherein “target device shall: 1> for each positioning method for which a request for capabilities is included in the message: 2> if the target device supports this positioning method: 3> include the capabilities of the device for that supported positioning method in the response message”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that the plurality of capability sets is transmitted at a same time as taught by ETSI in order to make efficient use of network resources.
Consider claim 22, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the plurality of capability sets is received at a same time.
In the same field of endeavor, ETSI discloses wherein the plurality of capability sets is received at a same time (see Section 5.1.3 “Reception of LPP Request Capabilities”, the target device generates a ProvideCapabilities message wherein “target device shall: 1> for each positioning method for which a request for capabilities is included in the message: 2> if the target device supports this positioning method: 3> include the capabilities of the device for that supported positioning method in the response message”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. such that the plurality of capability sets is received at a same time as taught by ETSI in order to make efficient use of network resources.
Claims 14 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) and further in view of Manolakos (WO 2021188220 A1).
Consider claim 14, and as applied to claim 1 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the indication is transmitted prior to a UE positioning session.
In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos et al. disclose wherein the indication is
transmitted prior to a UE positioning session (see Fig. 11, at step 1120 “the first UE receives, from the at least one second UE over the sidelink, an indication of a set of time resources, frequency resources, or both allocated for the positioning procedure” (see paragraph 0131). The UE positioning session begins subsequently at 1130).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the indication is transmitted prior to a UE positioning session as taught by Manolakos et al. in order to ensure the second UE/base station/network entity selects appropriate settings that reflect UE capabilities prior to positioning.
Consider claim 29, and as applied to claim 16 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. fail to disclose wherein the indication is received prior to a UE positioning session.
In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos et al. disclose wherein the indication is received prior to a UE positioning session (see Fig. 11, at step 1120 “the first UE receives, from the at least one second UE over the sidelink, an indication of a set of time resources, frequency resources, or both allocated for the positioning procedure” (see paragraph 0131). The UE positioning session begins subsequently at 1130).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the indication is received prior to a UE positioning session as taught by Manolakos et al. in order to ensure the second UE/base station/network entity selects appropriate settings that reflect UE capabilities prior to positioning.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wachter et al. (US 20170251502 A1) in view of Vamanan et al. (WO 2016025548 A1) further in view of Qualcomm (“LPP impacts for UE positioning capability storage”) further in view of Sankar et al. (US 20180132223 A1), and further in view of Manolakos et al. (WO 2021188220 A1).
Consider claim 19, and as applied to claim 18 above, Wachter et al. as modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm fail to disclose wherein the indication is received via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE) if the communication entity is the AMF.
In the same field of endeavor, Sankar et al. disclose wherein the indication is received via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), or an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE) (see Figure 1, “communications component 150 can transmit the mid-amble position indication 152 or the UE capability information 154 [to base station 105] using static, semi-static, or dynamic signaling (e.g., in UCI, using RRC signaling, etc.)” (see paragraph 0067)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that the indication is received via a lower layer signaling, uplink control information (UCI), or an uplink (UL) medium access control (MAC)-control element (UL MAC-CE) as taught by Manolakos et al. in conjunction with the AMF taught by Qualcomm in order to align the apparatus with 5G communications standards.
However, the combination of Wachter et al., Vamanan et al., Qualcomm, and Sankar et
al. fail to disclose wherein the indication is received via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE) if the communication entity is the sidelink UE, the base station, or the LMF.
In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos et al. disclose wherein the indication is received via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE) if the communication entity is the sidelink UE, the base station, or the LMF (see Figure 3, “the UE 302 may attempt to establish a unicast connection over a sidelink with the UE 304, which may be a V2X sidelink between the UE 302 and UE 304” (see paragraph 0072). “UE 304 may create a service announcement (e.g., a service capability message) to transmit over a cellular network (e.g., cV2X) to assist the sidelink connection establishment…the service announcement transmitted by UE 304 and other nearby UEs (e.g., a discovery signal) may be an upper layer signal and broadcasted (e.g., in an NR sidelink broadcast). In some cases, the UE 304 may include one or more parameters for itself in the service announcement, including connection parameters and/or capabilities it possesses” (see paragraph 0074)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus disclosed by Wachter et al. and modified by Vamanan et al. and Qualcomm such that wherein the indication is received via a higher layer signaling, sidelink control information (SCI), or a SL medium access control (MAC)-control element (SL MAC-CE) if the communication entity is the sidelink UE, the base station, or the LMF as taught by Manolakos et al. in order to allow the apparatus to use sidelink-based UE positioning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER WU whose telephone number is (571)272-3360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571)272-7915. 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 httos://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.
/ALEXANDER WU/Examiner, Art Unit 2642
/Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights