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 papers submitted claiming the benefit of U.S. Non-Provisional Application No. GB2204476.2, filed on 03/29/2022, and Application No. GB2206676.5, filed on 05/06/2022, which papers have been placed of record in the file required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 09/27/2024 and 08/29/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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)(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, 5, 8, 10, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by HOU et al. (US 2025/0240766 A1, hereinafter Hou).
Regarding claim 1, Hou teaches a method performed by a first user equipment (UE) in a wireless communications system, the method comprising: receiving from a location management function (LMF) entity, a request for ranging; performing the ranging ([Figure 7, "2. obtaining first information"] and [0137], "after receiving the location request message (from the LMF, see FIG. 7), the AMF network function obtains first information from the target UE," i.e. the ability for the target/first UE to receive a location request, which may include a relative distance between, "relative distance between" read as ranging, the first UE and a neighbor/second UE, see [0112] and further explained below); and transmitting to the LMF entity, a result of the ranging, wherein the ranging is determining of at least one of a distance or a direct from the first UE to a second UE ([Figure 7, "3. second message"] and [0140] - [0141], the AMF request message (initially from the LMF, see FIG. 7) is received by a target UE, wherein the "second message" may include a command for the first/target UE "to use neighbor UE to assist in positioning" see [0137]. Furthermore, [0129] describes "the LMF network function may obtain the positioning result of the neighbor UE, such as the location, measurement information of the neighbor UE, measurement information of the PC5 interface, relative distance between the neighbor UE and the target UE, etc.", i.e. the ability for the range/distance between the first and second UE to be calculated).
Regarding claim 5, Hou teaches the method further comprises transmitting at least one of a ranging capability of the second UE or a ranging capability of the first UE to an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) entity ([0138] referring to FIG. 7, "the first information may include one or more of the following information: capability information of the target UE," i.e. location capability information of the first UE, see [FIG. 7, "2. Obtaining first information"]. Furthermore, [0122] describes this capability information may specifically include: "the AMF network function further needs to determine whether the neighbor UE has provided capability for supporting assisted positioning during the registration procedure based on the context of the neighbor UE", "supporting assisted positioning" read as ranging capabilities, i.e. the ability for the AMF to determine the first and second UE ranging capabilities).
Regarding claim 8, Hou teaches the ranging comprises at least one of distance measurement or direction measurement ([0112] "the measurement information of the interface between the neighbor UE and the target UE may include signal strength, a relative distance, etc.," i.e. the measurement includes a distance measurement).
Regarding claim 10, Hou teaches the request includes one or more parameters for configuration of the ranging, and the method further comprises configuring the first UE based on the one or more parameters (referring to FIG. 7, [0140] describes "after obtaining the first information from the target UE, the AMF network function transmits a second message to the target UE, where the second message is configured for requesting the association information of the neighbor UE," i.e. association information read as one or more parameters for configuration of the ranging, wherein the first UE is configured to transmit to the second UE based on the parameters for configuration of the ranging).
Regarding claim 12, Hou teaches the request includes at least one of: the second UE, the first UE, information for Quality of Service (QoS), a distance threshold for an event, information for a time to trigger for an event, or information for a measurement frequency for an event (as described in claim 10, the request includes information about the ranging capabilities of the UEs, see FIG. 7 and [0140], i.e. includes the second UE and the first UE).
Regarding claim 13, Hou teaches the transmitting of the result of the ranging comprises transmitting, to the LMF entity, an indication that a reporting threshold has been reached for a range between the second UE and the first UE ([0176] describes "as shown in FIG. 12, in an embodiment of the present application, the target UE monitors the positioning event, such as an arrival of a positioning period, the UE has moved out of a specific area, a linear movement distance of the UE exceeds a specific threshold, etc. The target UE obtains the information of the neighbor UE, and after obtaining the information, transmits a positioning event report (i.e., the first message) to the AMF. The positioning event report includes the positioning event and the information of the neighbor UE." Additionally, the AMF may transmit the results to the LMF, see [0178]. Transmitting the result of a reporting threshold being reached to the LMF).
Regarding claim 14, the claimed limitations of claim are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, the claimed limitations of claim are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, further in view of Hou teaches a method performed by a location management function (LMF) entity in a wireless communications system, the method comprising- similar operations of claim 1 ([0127] - [0129] and [0145] - [0146], the LMF network function may obtain the positioning result of the neighbor UE and perform the similar operations of claim 1. Also see the LMF depicted in FIG. 7/8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-4, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HOU et al. (US 2025/0240766 A1, hereinafter Hou) in view of Edge et al. (US 2020/0053638 A1, hereinafter Edge).
Regarding claim 2, Hou is not relied on for the claim language the request is originated from an application function (AF) entity. However, Edge teaches [abstract] a method wherein location services for a user equipment (UE) are supported with a Network Exposure Function (NEF). Edge also teaches the request is originated from an application function (AF) entity ([0081] and [Figure 5, AF 163], FIG. 5 depicts AF 163 sending a location service request for a UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include an AF entity, a GMLC entity, and an AMF entity, as taught by Edge, in order to [0045] enable more accurate location of a target UE, [0049] improve location accuracy for the AMF location method, and reduce the cost and complexity of location support by a network, and therefore [0048] optimize network location service decision logic.
Regarding claim 3, Hou is not relied on for the claim language the request is transmitted from the AF entity to a Gateway Mobile Location Centre (GMLC) entity directly or via a Network Exposure Function (NEF) entity. However, Edge teaches as such (as described in claim 2, FIG. 5 depicts AF 163 transmitting a location service request see [0081], wherein the request is received at a Gateway Mobile Location Centre (GMLC) 155 in step 3b, see [0088]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include an AF entity, a GMLC entity, and an AMF entity, as taught by Edge, in order to [0045] enable more accurate location of a target UE, [0049] improve location accuracy for the AMF location method, and reduce the cost and complexity of location support by a network, and therefore [0048] optimize network location service decision logic.
Regarding claim 4, Hou teaches the GMLC entity requests location information to an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) entity ([0136] describes "before the target UE transmits the first message to the AMF network function, the method may include: receiving, by the AMF network function, the location request message transmitted from the GMLC…" see [FIG. 7, "1. location request message"], i.e. the GMLC requests location information to an AMF).
Regarding claim 9, Hou is not relied on for the claim language the result is transmitted from the LMF entity to an application function (AF) entity via at least one of an Access and Mobility Management (AMF) entity or an Gateway Mobile Location Centre (GMLM) entity. However, Edge teaches as such ([0089] - [0092] referring to FIG. 5, stage 5b and 6, the UE location information is transmitted to the AF entity 163 from the NEF 159 originating from the GMLC 155, wherein "the NEF 159 may subscribe to UE location information from the AMF 154 directly, (see [0092])" i.e. the ability for the location information to be transmitted from the AMF to the AF. Additionally, [0089] describes "LMF 152 may then obtain the UE 105 location (e.g. using A-GNSS, RTK, OTDOA, ECID, AOA, RTT and/or AOD) and may return the location to GMLC 155 either via AMF 154 or directly," i.e. the location information originates from the LMF, i.e. the result may be transmitted from the LMF to the AF through the AMF.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include an AF entity, a GMLC entity, and an AMF entity, as taught by Edge, in order to [0045] enable more accurate location of a target UE, [0049] improve location accuracy for the AMF location method, and reduce the cost and complexity of location support by a network, and therefore [0048] optimize network location service decision logic.
Claims 6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HOU et al. (US 2025/0240766 A1, hereinafter Hou) in view of Wang et al. (US 2017/0337394 A1, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 6, Hou teaches the ranging capability includes- (as described in claim 5, the AMF may acquire the capabilities of the first and second UE, see [0138] and [0122]).
Hou is not relied on for the claim language -one or more of a proximity-based services (ProSe) capability and a Location Privacy Indication (LPI). However, Wang teaches [abstract] a method wherein a location and other status information may be communicated between Proximity Service (ProSe) users. Wang also teaches -one or more of a proximity-based services (ProSe) capability and a Location Privacy Indication (LPI) (referring to FIG. 4, [0096] describes "at 402 and 404, for example, one or more WTRUs (e.g., each WTRU) may perform WTRU registration for ProSe with a ProSe function," i.e. discovering the ProSe capabilities of the WTRU device during ProSe registration. Additionally, the WTRU may indicate privacy preferences in association with location settings, i.e. an indicator for location privacy, see [0108]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include proximity-based services (ProSe) capability and a Location Privacy Indication (LPI), as taught by Wang, in order to [0072] enable the exchange of location and other status information between Proximity Service (ProSe) devices, [0089] enable WTRUs to engage in Direct Discovery procedures under various discovery models, and [0108] allow the network to retrieve the user’s location in association with the corresponding privacy indicator.
Regarding claim 11, Hou is not relied on for the claim language the configuring of the first UE is performed by a ProSe Application Server (ProSe AS) or a Policy Control Function (PCF) entity. However, Wang teaches as such ([0072] describes "a ProSe function may be an entity in a network, such as a server", i.e. a ProSe AS. Additionally, FIG. 4 depicts ProSe Function A configuring UE A see [0096], i.e. a ProSe AS may configure the first UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include the use of a ProSe AS, as taught by Wang, in order to [0072] enable the exchange of location and other status information between Proximity Service (ProSe) devices, [0089] enable WTRUs to engage in Direct Discovery procedures under various discovery models, and [0108] allow the network to retrieve the user’s location in association with the corresponding privacy indicator.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HOU et al. (US 2025/0240766 A1, hereinafter Hou) in view of KO et al. (US 2022/0385423 A1, hereinafter Ko).
Regarding claim 7, Hou is not relied on for the claim language the ranging comprises sidelink positioning. However, Ko teaches [abstract] a method of determining parameters relating to a sidelink positioning reference signal (S-PRS) on the basis of information obtained by means of a device. Ko also teaches the ranging comprises sidelink positioning ([0169] and [0171] the ranging distance between UEs may specifically comprise transmitting S-PRSs. "a sidelink positioning reference signal (S-PRS)", see [0156], i.e. sidelink positioning).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou to include the ability for sidelink positioning, as taught by Ko, in order to [0238] reduce the positioning delay, and [0245] increase positioning accuracy.
References Cited
Hou, Yunjing et al. (2025). Assisted positioning method and apparatus, and storage medium (US 2025/0240766 A1). Filed 2022-10-25.
Edge, Stephen William et al. (2020). Methods and systems for supporting unified location of a mobile device in a 5g network (US 2020/0053638 A1). Filed 2019-08-10.
Wang, Guanzhou et al. (2017). Enabling exchange of location and other status information between prose users (US 2017/0337394 A1). Filed 2015-10-02.
Ko, Woosuk et al. (2022). Method and device for transmitting s-prs in nr v2x (US 2022/0385423 A1). Filed 2020-10-30.
Other Pertinent References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Basu Mallick, Prateek et al. (2023). Retransmitting a transport block with sidelink feedback not enabled (US 2023/0077779 A1). Filed 2021-01-16. Discloses a method for retransmitting a transport block with sidelink feedback not enabled. (abstract)
Tanaka, YOSHINORI (2017). Communications system, communications method, communications apparatus, and mobile terminal (US 2017/0127267 A1). Filed 2017-01-11. Discloses a communication system for a plurality of mobile terminals to communicate in a wireless network, in association with a gateway mobile location center (GMLC). (abstract and [0113])
Pateromichelakis, Emmanouil et al. (2025). Mapping applications and location service profiles (US 2025/0150783 A1). Filed 2021-09-28. Discloses a method for mapping applications and location service profiles. (abstract)
Enomoto, MASAYUKI et al. (2016). Communication control method, terminal device, and base station apparatus (US 2016/0143080 A1). Filed 2014-06-30. Discloses a method of a first terminal device for causing the first terminal device and a second terminal device positioned in the proximity of the first terminal device to establish a direct communication path. (abstract)
Zhang, Xiaowei et al. (2016). Security management according to location change in proximity based services (US 2016/0277418 A1). Filed 2014-08-27. Discloses a method for managing security of ProSe (Proximity based Services) communication. (abstract)
Khoryaev, Alexey et al. (2016). Device-to-device assisted positioning in wireless cellular technologies (US 2016/0095080 A1). Filed 2015-03-27. Discloses a method wherein the position of a User Equipment (UE) may be determined based on information communicated through direct UE-to-UE communications. (abstract)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J DWYER whose telephone number is (571)272-5121. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6 a.m. - 3 p.m. EST.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached at (571) 272-7855. 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.
/MATTHEW JAMES DWYER/Examiner, Art Unit 2649
/GEORGE ENG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2699
Prosecution Insights