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 (IDS) submitted on 08/29/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitations “means for receiving”, “means for storing”, “means for transmitting”, “means for detecting,” “means for determining,” “means for sending,” and “means for selecting”, have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they use a generic placeholder “means for” coupled with functional language “receiving”, “storing”, “transmitting”, “detecting,” “determining,” “sending,” and “selecting”, without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitations invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 22-36 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows lack of sufficient and adequate structure (or material or algorithm) for performing the above functions.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 22-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 22-36 are rejected under 112(b) because the specification does not disclose adequate and sufficient structure (or material or acts or algorithm) for performing the recited functions (invoking the 112, sixth paragraph) in the claims resulting in no definite boundaries.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the mapping" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
(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) 22-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoang et al. (US 20220159741).
Regarding claim 22, Hoang discloses an apparatus (WTRU 102; Fig. 2) comprising:
means for receiving an activation signal (the SSB set 601 may include first and second SSBs 601-1, 601-2. The initial frequency for PRACH may be conveyed to the WTRU via SIB1; [0148-0149]);
means for transmitting a reply to the activation signal over a carrier (the WTRU 102 may select one PRACH occasion to transmit Msg1. Based on which of the delay difference periods 607-1, 607-2 includes the selected PRACH occasion, the WTRU 102 may select either the first preamble group 605-1 or the second preamble group 605-2; [0148]);
means for selecting the carrier based on a delay used by the apparatus between the receipt of the activation signal and the transmission of the reply (beginning of the delay difference period may be determined based on a time that the WTRU receives SIB1 or an initial occasion of a PRACH resource; [0133].
the WTRU may be configured to select different frequency resources to transmit Msg1 based on its PRACH transmission time within the delay difference period. This approach may avoid a misunderstanding between the network and the WTRU in calculating RA-RNTI. The initial frequency for PRACH may be conveyed to the WTRU via SIB1. Based on the time index of the PRACH occasion within the delay difference period, the WTRU may determine the frequency to transmit Msg1. This frequency may be determined as f=finit+PRACHindex*Δf, where finit is the initial frequency of PRACH indicated in/by SIB1 and Δf is the frequency resource for each PRACH; [0149]).
Regarding claim 23, Hoang discloses wherein the carrier is selected based on a mapping between a delay value range or a delay value and the carrier (the WTRU 102 may be configured with three PRACH transmission times within at least the first delay difference period 707-1. Based on a time index within the delay difference period 707-1, the WTRU 102 may select an appropriate frequency to transmit Msg1; [0151].
the WTRU may determine a time index of every delay difference period. This approach may allow the network to group all Msg1 transmissions in one frequency and within a delay difference period to one RA-RNTI value. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 10, each delay difference period consists of two PRACH time instances. Therefore, the two PRACH time instances within one delay difference period have the same index; [0180]).
Regarding claim 24, Hoang discloses wherein the mapping is either a predetermined mapping or is received from a network entity configured to manage a positioning session for the apparatus (WTRU may be configured to select different frequency resources to transmit Msg1 based on its PRACH transmission time within the delay difference period; [0149]).
Regarding claim 25, Hoang discloses means for receiving, from the network entity, at least one of: information indicative of an identifier of a network entity configured to activate the apparatus; information indicative of an identifier of a network entity configured to detect the apparatus (WTRU 102 may receive Msg2 (205) from the gNB; using the RA-RNTI to descramble the message. Msg2 may include any of a timing advance (TA), a power adjustment/correction, a temporary cell radio network temporary identifier (TC-RNTI); [0110]).
Regarding claim 26, Hoang discloses means for storing an identifier of the apparatus, wherein the identifier is used for the reply to the activation signal (WTRU 102 may transmit its identity and an initial access establishment (Msg3) (207) to the network using the granted resource scheduled in Msg2; [0111]).
Regarding claim 27, Hoang discloses wherein the delay used by the apparatus comprises at least one of: a processing delay, a wake up delay, a charging delay, a reception delay, or a transmission delay (WTRU may transmit one Msg1 in one PRACH occasion if it can estimate the transmission delay accurately. The transmission delay may be obtained by using GNSS information. Alternatively, for example, as shown in FIG. 11, the WTRU may transmit several Msg1s before one PRACH occasion and over multiple PRACH occasions if the transmission delay is not accurately estimated by the WTRU; [0184]).
Regarding claim 28, Hoang discloses an apparatus configured to manage a positioning session for a device (base station 114. determining a RACH configuration for transmitting any of Msg1, Msg3 and MsgA based on one or more factors including a capability of estimating a timing advance (TA), and capability of estimating a position; [0021, 0083]), the apparatus comprising:
means for sending information indicative of a mapping between a delay value range or a delay value (the WTRU 102 may be configured with three PRACH transmission times within at least the first delay difference period 707-1. Based on a time index within the delay difference period 707-1, the WTRU 102 may select an appropriate frequency to transmit Msg1; [0151].
the WTRU may determine a time index of every delay difference period. This approach may allow the network to group all Msg1 transmissions in one frequency and within a delay difference period to one RA-RNTI value. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 10, each delay difference period consists of two PRACH time instances. Therefore, the two PRACH time instances within one delay difference period have the same index; [0180])
used by the device between the receipt of an activation signal and the transmission of a reply to the activation signal and a carrier used by the device for transmitting the reply (beginning of the delay difference period may be determined based on a time that the WTRU receives SIB1 or an initial occasion of a PRACH resource; [0133].
the WTRU may be configured to select different frequency resources to transmit Msg1 based on its PRACH transmission time within the delay difference period. This approach may avoid a misunderstanding between the network and the WTRU in calculating RA-RNTI. The initial frequency for PRACH may be conveyed to the WTRU via SIB1. Based on the time index of the PRACH occasion within the delay difference period, the WTRU may determine the frequency to transmit Msg1. This frequency may be determined as f=finit+PRACHindex*Δf, where finit is the initial frequency of PRACH indicated in/by SIB1 and Δf is the frequency resource for each PRACH; [0149]).
Regarding claim 29, Hoang discloses wherein the information indicative of the mapping is sent to at least one of: the device; or a network entity configured to detect the device (WTRU may determine the delay difference period. In an embodiment, the WTRU may determine the delay difference period based on (as a function of, etc.) any of a maximum delay difference within a beam, a PRACH configuration period, a synchronization signal block (SSB) period, and a preconfigured value based on a satellite type. maximum delay difference within a beam may be conveyed to the WTRU by the network via a MIB and/or a SIB1. In an embodiment, the PRACH configuration period may be notified to the WTRU via a SIB1. In an embodiment, the Synchronization Signal Block (SSB) period may be preconfigured or notified to the WTRU via a SIB1. In an embodiment, the beginning of the delay difference period may be determined based on a time that the WTRU receives SIB1 or an initial occasion of a PRACH resource; [0132-0133]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US 20220159741) in view of Balasubramanian et al. (US 20240061063).
Regarding claim 31, Hoang does not expressly disclose means for receiving, from the network entity configured to detect the device, positioning information for the device, and the identifier of the network entity configured to detect the device.
In an analogous art, Balasubramanian discloses means for receiving, from the network entity configured to detect the device, positioning information for the device, and the identifier of the network entity configured to detect the device (A PRS resource set is identified by a PRS resource set ID and may be associated with a particular TRP (identified by a cell ID) transmitted by an antenna panel of a base station. A PRS resource ID in a PRS resource set may be associated with an omnidirectional signal, and/or with a single beam (and/or beam ID) transmitted from a single base station (where a base station may transmit one or more beams). Each PRS resource of a PRS resource set may be transmitted on a different beam and as such, a PRS resource (or simply resource) can also be referred to as a beam. This does not have any implications on whether the base stations and the beams on which PRS are transmitted are known to the UE; [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Balasubramanian into the system of Hoang in order to improve positioning accuracy of a target UE that is non-line-of-sight (NLOS) relative to a network entity (Balasubramanian; [0019]).
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US 20220159741) in view of Abdelghaffar et al. (US 20230361957).
Regarding claim 32, Hoang does not expressly disclose means for sending information indicative of a transmit time of the activation signal to at least one of: a network entity configured to activate the device, or the network entity configured to detect the device.
In an analogous art, Abdelghaffar discloses means for sending information indicative of a transmit time of the activation signal to at least one of: a network entity configured to activate the device, or the network entity configured to detect the device (the base station may transmit to a user equipment a plurality of indications specifying a plurality of time occasions relative to a reference slot for transmission of a sounding reference signal (SRS) by the user equipment. For example, the SRS configuration circuitry 2442 together with the communication and processing circuitry 2441 and the transceiver 2410, shown and described above in connection with FIG. 24, may provide a means to transmit to a user equipment a plurality of indications specifying a plurality of time occasions relative to a reference slot for transmission of a sounding reference signal (SRS) by the user equipment; [0293]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Abdelghaffar into the system of Hoang in order to efficiently allocate resources and transmission parameters for communication over multiple channels (Abdelghaffar; [0005]).
Claim(s) 33-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US 20220159741) in view of Bollard et al. (US 20230353991).
Regarding claim 33, Hoang discloses an apparatus (WTRU 102; Fig. 2) comprising:
means for receiving a reply from a device, the reply being transmitted by the device in response to an activation signal received by the device (the WTRU 102 may select one PRACH occasion to transmit Msg1. Based on which of the delay difference periods 607-1, 607-2 includes the selected PRACH occasion, the WTRU 102 may select either the first preamble group 605-1 or the second preamble group 605-2. the SSB set 601 may include first and second SSBs 601-1, 601-2. The initial frequency for PRACH may be conveyed to the WTRU via SIB1; [0148-0149]);
means for receiving information indicative of a mapping between a delay value range or a delay value (the WTRU 102 may be configured with three PRACH transmission times within at least the first delay difference period 707-1. Based on a time index within the delay difference period 707-1, the WTRU 102 may select an appropriate frequency to transmit Msg1; [0151].
the WTRU may determine a time index of every delay difference period. This approach may allow the network to group all Msg1 transmissions in one frequency and within a delay difference period to one RA-RNTI value. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 10, each delay difference period consists of two PRACH time instances. Therefore, the two PRACH time instances within one delay difference period have the same index; [0180])
used by the device between the receipt of the activation signal and the transmission of the reply and a carrier used by the device for transmitting the reply (beginning of the delay difference period may be determined based on a time that the WTRU receives SIB1 or an initial occasion of a PRACH resource; [0133].
the WTRU may be configured to select different frequency resources to transmit Msg1 based on its PRACH transmission time within the delay difference period. This approach may avoid a misunderstanding between the network and the WTRU in calculating RA-RNTI. The initial frequency for PRACH may be conveyed to the WTRU via SIB1. Based on the time index of the PRACH occasion within the delay difference period, the WTRU may determine the frequency to transmit Msg1. This frequency may be determined as f=finit+PRACHindex*Δf, where finit is the initial frequency of PRACH indicated in/by SIB1 and Δf is the frequency resource for each PRACH; [0149]); and
Hoang does not expressly disclose means for determining positioning information for the device based on a transmit time of the activation signal, a receipt time of the reply, the carrier over which the reply has been received, and the information indicative of the mapping.
In an analogous art, Bollard discloses means for determining positioning information for the device based on a transmit time of the activation signal, a receipt time of the reply, the carrier over which the reply has been received, and the information indicative of the mapping (providing distance values between a tag device and a plurality of tag response receptor units of a real-time location system including transmitting two successive beacon frames at a first beacon transmission time point and a second beacon transmission time point with a beacon transmission unit of a master beacon device, wherein the two successive beacon frames are transmitted with a master time delay that corresponds to a master time delay data. determining a first tag beacon time point and a second tag beacon time point for the receiving of the two successive beacon frames at the tag device, generating a tag-specific reception time delay data from the first tag beacon time point and the second tag beacon time point, calibrating a tag time of the tag device to a master time of the master beacon device by comparing the tag-specific reception time delay data and the master time delay data. deriving accumulated time-of-flight periods by subtracting the tag-specific emission time delay of the tag device from the determined path time periods, wherein each time-of-flight period is associated to a transmission path from the master beacon device to one of the respective response receptor units via the tag device, and determining the distance values associated to the position of the selected tag device from the determined accumulated time-of-flight periods and installation position data representing the position of each of the plurality of tag response receptor units and the beacon transmission unit of the master beacon device; [0151-0163]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Bollard into the system of Hoang in order to decrease any interference and enabling a large number of devices to be locatable within one location protocol (Bollard; [0244]).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Hoang and Bollard, particularly Hoang discloses means for receiving at least one of:
information indicative of an identifier of a network entity configured to activate the device; information indicative of the transmit time of the activation signal (WTRU 102 may receive Msg2 (205) from the gNB; using the RA-RNTI to descramble the message. Msg2 may include any of a timing advance (TA), a power adjustment/correction, a temporary cell radio network temporary identifier (TC-RNTI); [0110]).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US 20220159741) in view of Bollard et al. (US 20230353991) and in view of Mehran et al. (US 20200267505).
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Hoang and Bollard does not expressly disclose means for detecting a poor detection quality of the reply; means for sending information indicative of the poor detection quality to a network entity configured to manage a positioning session for the device.
In an analogous art, Mehran discloses means for detecting a poor detection quality of the reply; means for sending information indicative of the poor detection quality to a network entity configured to manage a positioning session for the device (if the quality of the connection between the UE and its serving base station (that is, the base station which it is connected to) drops below an operator defined threshold, then an occurrence of a Radio Link Failure (RLF) is recorded (in memory 35a) and reported. Furthermore, the first UE 30a includes a GPS function, which is implemented by processor 33a and GPS receiver 38a, which allows the first UE 30a to determine its location. The other UEs of the plurality of UEs are of the same or similar form to the first UE 30a; [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Mehran into the system of Hoang and Bollard in order to balance between the urgency of collecting location data for each UE with the power consumption required for UEs to frequently report their locations (Mehran; [0055]).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US 20220159741) in view of Bollard et al. (US 20230353991) and in view of Balasubramanian et al. (US 20240061063).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Hoang and Bollard does not expressly disclose means for sending the positioning information to a network entity configured to manage a positioning session for the device.
In an analogous art, Balasubramanian discloses means for sending the positioning information to a network entity configured to manage a positioning session for the device (A PRS resource set is identified by a PRS resource set ID and may be associated with a particular TRP (identified by a cell ID) transmitted by an antenna panel of a base station. A PRS resource ID in a PRS resource set may be associated with an omnidirectional signal, and/or with a single beam (and/or beam ID) transmitted from a single base station (where a base station may transmit one or more beams). Each PRS resource of a PRS resource set may be transmitted on a different beam and as such, a PRS resource (or simply resource) can also be referred to as a beam. This does not have any implications on whether the base stations and the beams on which PRS are transmitted are known to the UE; [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Balasubramanian into the system of Hoang and Bollard in order to improve positioning accuracy of a target UE that is non-line-of-sight (NLOS) relative to a network entity (Balasubramanian; [0019]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 30 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 30, if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, would comprise a combination of elements which is not taught by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kumar et al. (US 20200068472), “POSITIONING ENHANCEMENTS FOR NARROWBAND MOBILE DEVICES.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OUSSAMA ROUDANI whose telephone number is (571)272-4727. The examiner can normally be reached 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, UN C CHO can be reached at (571) 272 7919. 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.
/OUSSAMA ROUDANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights