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 .
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.
Response to Preliminary Amendment
This action is responsive to a preliminary amendment filed 16 July 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 11-13 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cho (US 2014/0155099 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cho appears to disclose a method performed by one or more processors of a first mobile device, comprising:
monitoring a strength of a network wireless signal (Fig. 1, [0022] terminal comprising controller 170; [0034] disclosing controller periodically measures an RSSI value of a wireless communication signal received from a base station; Fig. 2, loop 230, 240, 250, [0040]);
storing a first previous location of the first mobile device at a first previous time when the strength of the network wireless signal was above a threshold ([0032], [0034] disclosing communication state information comprising location associated with measured RSSI; Fig. 3, 310, [0043] disclosing at 310 controller 170 determines there is no service and RSSI indicates a level of service provided; [0048] a past location previously visited associated with collected state information at a predetermined level of service greater than the level of service at the current location);
receiving a request to provide information about previous network connectivity of the first mobile device ([0050] disclosing a user input may be received requesting directions to a location where the terminal can make an emergency call);
responsive to the request, retrieving the first previous location; and providing the first previous location to a user of the first mobile device ([0050]-[0051] disclosing responsive to said user request, controller 170 can use the previously collected communication state information to provide an indication of a path between the current location and a location where emergency calls are expected to be possible to make; [0049] a path to a location where an improved network service is expected to be available).
Regarding claim 2, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein storing the first previous location includes: storing, in a first table, strength information of the network wireless signal at one or more times; and storing, in a second table, locations of the first mobile device at the one or more times (Fig. 5, 510, 520, 530, [0053]).
Regarding claim 7, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first previous location is measured using GPS ([0034]).
Regarding claim 8, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the network wireless signal is an in-network signal, an out-of-network signal, or a satellite signal ([0016]-[0020]).
Regarding claim 11, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the network wireless signal is received at the first mobile device ([0032], [0040]).
Regarding claim 12, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending a message after the first mobile device reaches the first previous location, wherein the message is an emergency message ([0037]).
Regarding claim 13, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 12, wherein the emergency message is an emergency phone call ([0037]).
Regarding claims 16-18, the claims are directed towards a mobile device, comprising: one or more processors; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors, the memory storing instructions that cause the one or more processors to perform part or all of the method of claims 1-2 and 8. Cho appears to disclose such implementations (Fig. 1, [0062]); accordingly, claims 16-18 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 1-2 and 8.
Regarding claim 19-20, the claims are directed towards a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a plurality of instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a mobile device, cause the one or more processors to perform the method of claims 1-2. Cho appears to disclose such implementations ([0062]). Accordingly, claims 19-20 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 1-2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho (US 2014/0155099 A1) in view of Hui et al. (US 2011/0029229 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Cho does not disclose the following; however, Hui suggests the method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining the first mobile device is within a non-urban location state ([0038]); and
retrieving the first previous location based on the first previous location being the non- urban location state ([0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill I the art before the effective, filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of Cho as suggested by Hui because this to aid a user who can quickly become lost due t unfamiliarity with the terrain ([0038]).
Regarding claim 4, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 3, further comprising:
retrieving a set of previous locations between a current location of the first mobile device and the first previous location ([0042], [0048]); and
displaying on the first mobile device a path from the current location to the first previous location, the path including the set of previous locations ([0053]).
Regarding claim 5, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 3, wherein determining the first mobile device is within the non-urban location state uses one or more of:
detectability of other network wireless signals at earlier times than the first previous time, one or more motion states of the first mobile device at the earlier times, and a classification of one or more map tiles within which the first mobile device resided at the earlier times ([0032], [0034], [0042], [0048]; Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Cho appears to disclose the method of claim 5, wherein the classification of one or more map tiles is whether a map tile is within an urban area (Fig. 5, [0050]-[0051]).
Claim(s) 9-10 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho (US 2014/0155099 A1) in view of Choi et al. (US 2016/0050531 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Cho does not disclose the following; however, Choi suggest the method of claim 1, wherein the strength of the network wireless signal is monitored at a second mobile device that is in local communication with the first mobile device ([0107]-[0108] disclosing the main device provides supplemental positioning information to the peripheral device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to supplement the measurements of Cho with measurements made by a main device taught by Choi because this can aid in situations where the state of the peripheral device prevents it from performing positioning ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 10, Cho does not disclose the following; however, Choi suggests the method of claim 9, wherein storing the first previous location uses a shared database between the first mobile device and the second mobile device ([0107]-[0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to supplement the measurements of Cho with measurements made by a main device taught by Choi because this can aid in situations where the state of the peripheral device prevents it from performing positioning ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 14, Cho does not disclose the following; however, Choi suggest the method of claim 1, wherein the first mobile device is a wearable device ([0041]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to supplement the measurements of Cho with measurements made by a main device taught by Choi because this can aid in situations where the state of the peripheral device prevents it from performing positioning ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 15, Cho does not disclose the following; however, Choi suggest the method of claim 14, wherein the wearable device is a watch ([0041]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to supplement the measurements of Cho with measurements made by a main device taught by Choi because this can aid in situations where the state of the peripheral device prevents it from performing positioning ([0005]-[0006]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph A Bednash whose telephone number is (571)270-7500. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM - 4:30 PM M-F.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/JOSEPH A BEDNASH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights