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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group I, claims 1-16 and 29 in the reply filed on 07/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17-28 and 30 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/27/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9-15 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoang et al. (US PGPUB 20240056997A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hoang teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) (see paragraph [0028] “ the WTRUs 102a, 102b, 102c, 102d, any of which may be referred to as a station (STA), may be configured to transmit and/or receive wireless signals and may include a user equipment (UE)”), comprising
receiving synchronization assistance data for a positioning session (see paragraphs [0262], [0304] “A WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) may determine whether to assign a WTRU to become a positioning synchronization source for a group of WTRUs based on synchronization information of each WTRU in the group, a WTRU may report sidelink positioning measurements to the network. For example, in some methods, the WTRU may report the set response WTRUs and the associated information to the network (e.g., gNB or LMF) (e.g., SL-RSRP, positioning information, synchronization information, etc.) to support the network in determining the set of A-WTRUs.”),
the synchronization assistance data indicating at least a synchronization status of each anchor node of a plurality of anchor nodes relative to other anchor nodes of the plurality of anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0354]- [0362] and FIG. 9 read as WTRUs doing positioning together. Need information about the timing/synchronization offset between one another. If the P-WTRU does not know the synchronization offset (synchronization status) between itself and one or more other WTRUs, it may select one WTRU to act as positioning synchronization information, [0359] the WTRU may trigger a synchronization offset determination procedure (e.g., RTT transmission/reception and measurement reporting procedure) to determine the synchronization offset between the WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) and another WTRU (e.g., A-WTRU). The WTRU trigger may be based on one or any combination of the following: (1) periodic; (2) the WTRU changes the synchronization source. (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation,” synchronization status” encompasses information indicating a timing relationship, synchronization offset, synchronization source, or availability of synchronization offset information for an anchor node relative to another anchor node”),
performing, during the positioning session, at least one positioning procedure with at least one anchor node of the plurality of anchor nodes based on the synchronization status of the at least one anchor node (see paragraphs [0271]- [0273], [0281] “read as a WTRU determines an positioning method, such as OTDOA, RTT, AoA or AoD based on synchronization information/ accuracy of the WTRU in the group. when synchronization accuracy is high, the WTRU may use a time-based method such as OTDOA [0281] “read as the WTRU selects or combines positioning methods based on the availability of synchronizations-offset information”).
Regarding claim 2, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Hoang teaches the synchronization assistance data comprises one or more groupings of the plurality of anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0287], [0302] “a WTRU may transmit a synchronization signal for a group of WTRUs to synchronize the transmission timing of the WTRUs in the group, [0302] a group of WTRUs may require a WTRU to transmit positioning synchronization signals to synchronize the transmission timing of the WTRUs in the group and/or support the WTRUs in performing sidelink measurement”), and
anchor nodes within each grouping of the one or more groupings are expected to be synchronized with each other (see paragraphs [0304], [0341] “ A WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) may determine whether to assign a WTRU to become a positioning synchronization source for a group of WTRUs based on synchronization information of each WTRU in the group, and WTRU to transmit synchronization signals if all WTRUs in the group are synchronized to one synchronization source (e.g., GNSS, one gNB, or one SSID). For example, the WTRU may require one WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) to transmit synchronization signal to the group one WTRU in the group (e.g., A-WTRU or P-WTRU) is directly/indirectly synchronized to GNSS. [0360] synchronization offset/status information among positioning WTRUs, including synchronization offset information between WTRUs and among different A WTRUs which may be provided to a P-WTRU or network to support accurate positioning calculation.”).
Regarding claim 3, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Hoang teaches the synchronization assistance data comprises a synchronization indicator for each of the plurality of anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0213], [0220] “the WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) may indicate further information about the synchronization sources. The information may be one or more of the following: a synchronization source WTRU ID of the group; an SSID of the synchronization source; a location (e.g., coordinate, zone ID, etc.) of the synchronization source WTRU; a priority of the synchronization source”), and
anchor nodes of the plurality of anchor nodes having the same synchronization indicator are expected to be synchronized with each other (see paragraphs [0213], [0220] “the WTRU may require the A-WTRU to use the same synchronization source and/or the same SSID”).
Regarding claim 7, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Hoang teaches wherein the synchronization assistance data is received via unicast or groupcast signaling (see paragraphs [0255], [0258], [0269], [0294], [read as the response message may include the WTRUs synchronization source, synchronization-source WRTU ID, SSID, timing information, etc. It also states that WTRUs with an existing unicast/groupcast session may be prioritized as assistant WTRUs”).
Regarding claim 9, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Hoang teaches detecting one or more anchor nodes of the plurality of anchor nodes (see paragraph [0203] “ At 306, after a set of A-WTRUs are determined, one or more WTRUs may perform SL-PRS resource allocation. At 308, one or more WTRUs may perform SL-PRS transmission and reception. At 310, one or more WTRUs may perform sidelink measurements. At 312, a sidelink positioning measurement report is created. At 314, one entity (e.g., the network or P-WTRU) may calculate the position of the WTRU based on the obtained sidelink measurement and reporting”),
and transmitting a request for the synchronization assistance data based on detection of the one or more anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0294] “WTRU may determine which positioning synchronization type to use when WTRU receives the positioning synchronization request from another node (e.g., a WTRU or gNB). For instance, the WTRU may receive a positioning synchronization transmission request from the peer WTRU”).
Regarding claim 10, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 9, In addition. Hoang teaches the request identifies the one or more anchor node (see paragraph [0205] “an A-WTRU to offer a positioning service to a P-WTRU. For example, the message may contain the identity of the WTRU (e.g., WTRU ID). The message may contain the identity of the positioning service (e.g., positioning service ID, destination ID). Specifically, the WTRU may be configured one or multiple IDs, each ID may be associated with one positioning service. The WTRU may then include the positioning service ID in the message based on its registered positioning service”).
Regarding claim 11, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 9, In addition. Hoang teaches anchor nodes of the plurality of anchor nodes other than the one or more anchor nodes are included in the synchronization assistance data based on the anchor nodes being expected to be measurable by the UE (see paragraph [0160] “sidelink positioning for a P-WTRU may require a set of assistant-WTRUs (A-WTRUs) and synchronization of the reference signal transmission/reception among the WTRUs. Therefore, methods to determine the set of A-WTRUs to support location of a P-WTRU are desirable. After the set of A-WTRU is formulated, methods to synchronize the SL-PRS transmission/reception to facilitate the measurement and reporting may be necessary”).
Regarding claim 12, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1, In addition. Hoang teaches wherein the plurality of anchor nodes comprises a plurality of sidelink UEs (see paragraph [0203], FIG. 3 “read as sidelink positioning procedure with WTRUs (UEs) and FIGS 4-6 read as multiple wireless devices operating as assistant positioning nodes over sidelink”).
Regarding claim 13, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1, In addition. Hoang teaches the plurality of anchor nodes comprises a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs) (see paragraph [0256] “The number of A-WTRUs may be based on the number of TRPs involving in the positioning procedure of the WTRU. Specifically, the WTRU may require more A-WTRUs when the number of TRPs is small and it may require less A-WTRU when the number of TRPs is large”).
Regarding claim 14, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1, In addition. Hoang teaches the at least one anchor node comprises multiple anchor nodes (see paragraph [0078] “FIGS. 1A-1D, and the corresponding description of FIGS. 1A-1D, one or more, or all, of the functions described herein with regard to one or more of: WTRU 102a-d, Base Station 114a-b, eNode-B 160a-c, MME 162, SGW 164, PGW 166, gNB 180a-c, AMF 182a-b, UPF 184a-b, SMF 183a-b, DN 185a-b, and/or any other device(s) described herein, may be performed by one or more emulation devices”),
the at least one positioning procedure comprises a time-difference of arrival (TDOA)-based positioning procedure, a multi-round-trip-time (multi-RTT) positioning procedure, or both (see paragraph [0212], FIG. 3 “the WTRU's supported positioning methods. Specifically, the WTRU may indicate which sidelink positioning methods (e.g., OTDOA, RTT, AoA, AoD, etc.)”).
Regarding claim 15, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1, In addition. Hoang teaches the at least one anchor node comprises a single anchor node (see paragraph [0281] “the WTRU may perform both TOA, and RTT methods, in which, the WTRU may require one WTRU to both transmit and receive SL-PRS“),
the at least one positioning procedure comprises a round-trip-time (RTT) positioning procedure (see paragraph [0281] “the WTRU may perform both TOA, and RTT methods, in which, the WTRU may require one WTRU to both transmit and receive SL-PRS“).
Regarding claim 29, Hoang teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: A memory (see paragraph [0046], FIG. 1B” read as memory”),
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the at least one transceiver, the at least one processor configured to (see paragraphs [0041], [0046], FIG. 1B” read as transceiver and processor”),
receiving synchronization assistance data for a positioning session (see paragraphs [0262], [0304] “A WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) may determine whether to assign a WTRU to become a positioning synchronization source for a group of WTRUs based on synchronization information of each WTRU in the group, a WTRU may report sidelink positioning measurements to the network. For example, in some methods, the WTRU may report the set response WTRUs and the associated information to the network (e.g., gNB or LMF) (e.g., SL-RSRP, positioning information, synchronization information, etc.) to support the network in determining the set of A-WTRUs.”),
the synchronization assistance data indicating at least a synchronization status of each anchor node of a plurality of anchor nodes relative to other anchor nodes of the plurality of anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0354]- [0362] and FIG. 9 read as WTRUs doing positioning together. Need information about the timing/synchronization offset between one another. If the P-WTRU does not know the synchronization offset (synchronization status) between itself and one or more other WTRUs, it may select one WTRU to act as positioning synchronization information, [0359] the WTRU may trigger a synchronization offset determination procedure (e.g., RTT transmission/reception and measurement reporting procedure) to determine the synchronization offset between the WTRU (e.g., P-WTRU) and another WTRU (e.g., A-WTRU). The WTRU trigger may be based on one or any combination of the following: (1) periodic; (2) the WTRU changes the synchronization source. (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation,” synchronization status” encompasses information indicating a timing relationship, synchronization offset, synchronization source, or availability of synchronization offset information for an anchor node relative to another anchor node”),
perform, during the positioning session, at least one positioning procedure with at least one anchor node of the plurality of anchor nodes based on the synchronization status of the at least one anchor node (see paragraphs [0271]- [0273], [0281] “read as a WTRU determines an positioning method, such as OTDOA, RTT, AoA or AoD based on synchronization information/ accuracy of the WTRU in the group. when synchronization accuracy is high, the WTRU may use a time-based method such as OTDOA [0281] “read as the WTRU selects or combines positioning methods based on the availability of synchronizations-offset information”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US PGPUB 20240056997A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of LEE et al. (US PGPUB 20230127817 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. However, Hoang fails to explicitly suggest the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more positioning system information blocks (Pos-SIBs) that carry additional assistance data for the positioning session.
However, in an analogous field of endeavor, LEE teaches the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more positioning system information blocks (Pos-SIBs) that carry additional assistance data for the positioning session (see paragraph [0303] “posSIB: positioning system information block. The posSIB may refer to an SIB containing positioning information. The posSIB may include assistance data for positioning. The assistance data may be included in a subfield (e.g., SIBpos) of the posSIB and also FIG. 9 target UE receive positioning assistance data from location server”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify Hoang with LEE to include by the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more positioning system information blocks (Pos-SIBs) that carry additional assistance data for the positioning session thereby, to use resources may be used more efficiently and the location may be more accurately estimated as taught by LEE (see paragraph [0314]).
Regarding claim 5, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. However, Hoang fails to explicitly suggest the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more Pos-SIBs dedicated for transmission of the synchronization assistance data.
However, in an analogous field of endeavor, LEE teaches the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more Pos-SIBs dedicated for transmission of the synchronization assistance data (see paragraph [0303] “posSIB: positioning system information block. The posSIB may refer to an SIB containing positioning information. The posSIB may include assistance data for positioning. The assistance data may be included in a subfield (e.g., SIBpos) of the posSIB and also FIG. 9 target UE receive positioning assistance data from location server”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify Hoang with LEE to include by the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more Pos-SIBs dedicated for transmission of the synchronization assistance data thereby, to use resources may be used more efficiently and the location may be more accurately estimated as taught by LEE (see paragraph [0314]).
Regarding claim 6, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. However, Hoang fails to explicitly suggest the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more on-demand SIBs.
However, in an analogous field of endeavor, LEE teaches the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more on-demand SIBs (see paragraphs [0303], [0508] “UE transmits a specific PRACH preamble to request a PosSIB, it may be interpreted to mean that the UE requests (read as UE may transmit a specific PRACH preamble to request a PosSIB,and PosSIB may include positioning data”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify Hoang with LEE to include by the synchronization assistance data is received from a base station in one or more on-demand SIBs thereby, to use resources may be used more efficiently and the location may be more accurately estimated as taught by LEE (see paragraph [0314]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US PGPUB 20240056997A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of AGNIHOTRI (US PGPUB 20190327707 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. However, Hoang fails to explicitly suggest the synchronization assistance data is received from a location server in one or more Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages.
However, in an analogous field of endeavor, AGNIHOTRI teaches the synchronization assistance data is received from a location server in one or more Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages (see paragraphs [0061], [0084], [0087] “The location server 170 then sends an LPP Provide Assistance Data message to the UE 120 at stage 612. In some implementations, the LPP Provide Assistance Data message at stage 612 may be sent by the location server 170 to the UE 120 in response to an LPP Request Assistance Data message sent by the UE 120 to the location server 170”. It is further noted that this is based on the LTE Positioning Protocol (LPP) defined in 3GPP TS 36.355).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify Hoang with AGNIHOTRI to include by the synchronization assistance data is received from a location server in one or more Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) messages thereby, LTE operations is designed to increase spectral efficiency and hence capacity of LTE systems as taught by AGNIHOTRI (see paragraph [0004]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang et al. (US PGPUB 20240056997A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Aljadeff et al. (US PGPUB 20040072582 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Hoang teaches all the limitations of claim 1. However, Hoang fails to explicitly suggest the at least one anchor node comprises at least two groups of synchronized anchor nodes, and the at least one positioning procedure comprises a positioning procedure with each of the at least two groups of synchronized anchor nodes.
However, in an analogous field of endeavor, Aljadeff teaches the at least one anchor node comprises at least two groups of synchronized anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0030], [0031], [0043], FIG. 1 and claim 27 “teaches multiple group synchronization arrangement in which location receivers are organized into multiple groups, the receivers within the respective groups are synchronized and the groups are referenced/synchronized with other groups through mutual location receivers”),
and the at least one positioning procedure comprises a positioning procedure with each of the at least two groups of synchronized anchor nodes (see paragraphs [0030], [0031], FIG.1 and claim 27 “teaches “a multiple group location finding” system (positioning session) having groups of location receivers are organized into multiple groups, and the groups are synchronized through receivers”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify Hoang with Aljadeff to including synchronized anchor nodes comprise at least two groups of synchronized anchor nodes thereby, reduces the number of filters required for virtually synchronizing the location receivers by distributing the computation of synchronization information and associating groups of location receivers within the wireless network. as taught by Aljadeff (see paragraph [0027]).
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTIBEN PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-9554. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 to 5:00 alternate Friday off.
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, Addy Anthony can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/ARTIBEN JAIMIN PATEL/ Examiner, Art Unit 2645
/ANTHONY S ADDY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2645
