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 .
This action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 12/13/2024. Claims 21-40 are pending and have been considered below.
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.
Claim(s) 21-23, 26, 27, 31-33, 36, 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lu (WO 2024000123; EP 4546838, for same PCT is used as English translation).
Regarding claim 21:
Lu discloses a system and method implemented by a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (see figures; abstract), the method comprising:
receiving a first sidelink (SL) positioning request from a second WTRU (para 56, partially reproduced herein with emphasis {receiving a direct communication request sent by the second UE}; para 75; para 117 {In a direct communication request message, the UE_1 includes the existing KNRP ID, its own security capabilities … a requested ranging service code (RSC) of the ranging/sidelink positioning service, and a security policy ..}), wherein the first SL positioning request comprises security information for validating the first SL positioning request and configuration information that includes one or more parameters to derive security credentials for validating the security information in the first SL positioning request (par 41; para 111 {authentication and the key establishment procedure based on a long term credential. The long term credential is provided to the UE as a root of the security}; figures 2,3,6,7; para 117 [security policy]; para 124 {security context for each ranging/sidelink positioning}; [here authentication is equivalent to validation]);
sending a first SL positioning response to the second WTRU, wherein the first SL positioning response is sent based on validation of the first SL positioning request using at least the security information (para 117 {sends a direct security mode complete message to the UE_2. The direct security mode complete message may include policy information of a security policy of a user plane of the ranging/sidelink positioning service}; fig 7 [step 7]); and
performing an SL positioning with the second WTRU (para 117 {direct communication accept}; figures; and see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claim 31:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above in claim 21, and further discloses a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising: a processor (figs 1,5,8; figure 9 [processor 820]; fig 10 [922]; para 149; and throughout the disclosure) configured to perform functions as above, thus claim 31 is rejected with similar rationale under teachings of the prior art as above.
Regarding claim 22, 32:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein performing an SL positioning with the second WTRU comprises receiving an indication of one or more distance measurements or direction measurements associated with the second WTRU (para 155 [detect a direction of the UE]; and throughout).
Regarding claims 23, 33:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein performing an SL positioning with the second WTRU comprises determining one or more distance measurements or direction measurements associated with the second WTRU (para 155 [detect a direction of the UE]; and throughout).
Regarding claim 26, 36:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and comprising performing discovery with the second WTRU based on receipt of a second SL positioning request from a network (para 145,159 [network function]; and throughout).
Regarding claim 27,37:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein the security information comprises one or more of an application function (AF) ID, location services (LCS) client information, a location information request for the first WTRU, a service type, a list of second WTRUs, quality of service (QoS) information, or a type of location request (para 24 [service type]; para 28-46; and throughout).
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.
Claim(s) 30,40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (WO 2024000123) in view of Thomas et al. (US 2024/0163835).
Regarding claims 30, 40:
Lu discloses all of the subject matter as described above, except for specifically teaching that initiating a mobile originated location request (MO-LR) based on the satisfaction of one or more trigger conditions.
However, Thomas in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for communication wherein initiating a mobile originated location request (MO-LR) based on the satisfaction of one or more trigger conditions (para 163-165; figs; and throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Thomas in Lu in order to perform SL positioning with physical layer SL positioning identifiers and using the reserved set of SL positioning resources (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24,25,28-29,34,35,38,39 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US 2026/0040257) discloses a system and method for parameter configuration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIRDEPAL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1688. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 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, Hannah S Wang can be reached on (571) 272-9018. 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.
/HIRDEPAL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights