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 .
Acknowledgment
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 10/04/2024 has been received and placed of record. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending in the instant 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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aweya et al (US 2010/0150117; art cited by applicant).
Regarding independent claim 1, Aweya teaches an apparatus comprising at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform: receiving, by a target device (fig. 1, 13 and fig. 3) of a mobile communications network, reference data from each of a plurality of nodes (fig. 1, 12) associated with a first positioning session, the reference data from a particular node representing the position of the particular node ([0040], [0046], [0047] and [0064]); determining, by the target device, for each of a plurality of pairs of the nodes, whether first and second nodes of the pair are collinear based at least in part on the reference data from the first and second nodes (fig. 11 and [0066]); and responsive to determining that at least one of the pairs has collinear first and second nodes, adding of one or more new nodes, not associated with the first positioning session, to a subsequent positioning session with at least some nodes of the first positioning session, wherein the nodes are configured to transmit positioning signals to the target device for the target device to determine its own position ([0070], [0072] and [0073], the algorithm continues to consider other nodes (subsets) until a position can be estimated, after the test of collinearity, [0067]: "This property can be used in the location algorithm of the present invention as a further test in ensuring that the radical lines do intersect when determining the location of client 14.”).
Regarding independent claim 15, the claim is a corresponding method claim and recites similar subject matter as in claim 1. Therefore, similar rationale is applied as for claim 1.
Regarding dependent claims 2 and 16, Aweya further teaches determining, for each pair of the nodes, a first distance (L1) between the first and second nodes based on the received reference data from a first and second nodes, a second distance (L2) between the target device and the first node, and a third distance (L3) between the target device and the second node, wherein determining whether the first and second nodes of the pair are collinear is based on the first, second and third distances (Li, L2, L3). See [0052].
Regarding dependent claim 6, Aweya further teaches wherein the plurality of nodes are user devices of a mobile communications network. See [0015].
Regarding dependent claims 7 and 20, Aweya further teaches wherein positioning signals and/or reference data are communicated over respective sidelinks between the target device and the plurality of nodes. See figs. 3 and 4.
Regarding dependent claim 9, Aweya further teaches wherein the second and third distances (L2, L3) are determined based on respective ranging signals, transmitted by the target device, to the first and second nodes of a particular pair of nodes. See [0015].
Regarding dependent claim 10, Aweya further teaches wherein the second and third distances (L2, L3) are determined based on a round-trip time (RTT) measurement from transmitting the respective ranging signals to the first and second nodes and receiving therefrom responsive reference signals. See [0034].
Regarding dependent claim 14, Aweya further teaches wherein the apparatus is the target device. See fig. 1.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aweya et al (US 2010/0150117; art cited by applicant) in view of Chen (US 2017/0094750; art cited by applicant).
Regarding dependent claims 3 and 17, Aweya teaches all subject matter claimed except to further teach determining the collinearity for the particular pair of nodes according to the algorithm as claimed. However, such determining is notoriously well-known in the art of digital communications. For example, Chen, from the same field of endeavor, teaches determining the collinearity for a pair of nodes according to the algorithm as claimed. See [0024]. 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 the system of Aweya by employing the teachings as taught by Chen in order to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aweya et al (US 2010/0150117; art cited by applicant) in view of Lu (Document entitled: “Joint Positioning and Tracking via NR Sidelink in 5G-Empowered Industrial loT: Releasing the Potential of V2X Technology”; art cited by applicant).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Aweya teaches all subject matter claimed except to further teach wherein the apparatus is further caused to perform, by the target device, a sidelink discovery process for identifying the plurality of nodes based on their proximity to the target device and for establishing the sidelink between the target device and each of the plurality of nodes. However, Lu, from the same field of endeavor, teaches “With regards to the sidelink operations and resource allocation, a direct-device-discovery mechanism as specified in the context of NR V2X [8] is assumed to be implemented among all the nodes within the sidelink coverage range to ensure a pervasive wireless connectivity.” See page 3, left column, second paragraph. 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 the system of Aweya by employing the teachings as taught by Lu in order to arrive at the claimed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 11-13, 18 and 19 are 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.
Conclusion
Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References Kaufmann et al (US 2014/0225779), Dong et al (US 2014/0315582), Tran et al (US 2022/0322040), Nam et al (US 2023/0094751) and Bao et al (US 2023/0284201) are cited because they are pertinent to the method and apparatus for positioning in a mobile communications. However, none of the cited references teaches or suggests the further arrangements as recited in the dependent claims 4, 5, 11-13, 18 and 19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DON NGUYEN VO whose telephone number is (571) 272-3018. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 9:00 to 6:30PM.
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kenneth N Vanderpuye, can be reached on 571-272-3078. 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.
/DON N VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights