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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 3-5 and 11-12 are objected to. The claims are objected to for the following reasons: The phrase “for plurality of sources” is found within each of these claims, which contains a small typographical error. For the purposes of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as “for the plurality of sources”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a processor system to execute” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The claims 9, 12-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(2) as being obvious over Peng et al. (US 20250151006 A1), hereinafter Peng,
Claim 9:
Regarding claim 9, Peng discloses
A computing device, comprising:
a memory configured to store computer instructions; and (Peng [0005] “An example UE (user equipment) includes: at least one memory;”)
a processor system configured to execute the computer instructions to (Peng [0005] “and at least one processor, communicatively coupled to the at least one memory ”):
obtain, from a plurality of sources, location data of a user device that is using a location-based service via a wireless communications network (Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) ”, further, Peng [0028] “For example, multiple locations of the UE may be determined based on reference signal measurements from multiple PRUs”);
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
generate a weight for the corresponding source based on a location uncertainty for the corresponding source; and (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
generate weighted location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the location data for the corresponding source and the weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”);
generate combined location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”); and
set the combined location data as captured location data of the user device for the location-based service (Peng [0051] “The server 150, e.g., a cloud server, is configured to obtain and provide location estimates of the UE 105 to the external client 130. ”).
Claim 12:
Regarding claim 12, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 9. Peng further discloses:
wherein the processor system generates the weighted location data for the corresponding source by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to: generate weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and the weight for the corresponding source; and(Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”)
generate weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and the weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”).
Claim 13:
Regarding claim 13, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 12. Peng further discloses:
wherein the processor system generates the combined location data for the user device by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to: generate combined x-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources; and (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”);
generate combined y-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”).
Claim 14:
Regarding claim 14, Peng disclose the computing device of claim 9. Peng further discloses:
wherein the processor system generates the weighted location data for the corresponding source by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to: generate weighted vertical location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of vertical location data for the corresponding source and the weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”).
Claim 15:
Regarding claim 15, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 14. Peng further discloses:
wherein the processor system generates the combined location data for the user device by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to: generate combined vertical location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted vertical location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”).
Claim 16:
Regarding claim 16, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 9. Peng further discloses:
wherein the processor system is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: cause the location-based service to use the captured location data of the user device. (Peng [0040] “For example, such other devices may include internet of thing (IoT) devices, medical devices, home entertainment and/or automation devices, etc. The 5GC 140 may communicate with the external client 130 (e.g., a computer system), e.g., to allow the external client 130 to request and/or receive location information regarding the UE 105 (e.g., via the GMLC 125).”)
Claim 18:
Regarding claim 18, Peng discloses the following :
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform actions, the actions comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, x-axis horizontal location data, y-axis horizontal location data, and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service (Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) ”, further, Peng [0028] “For example, multiple locations of the UE may be determined based on reference signal measurements from multiple PRUs”);
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
generating weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and an x-axis horizontal weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”;
generating weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and a y-axis horizontal weight for the corresponding source (See above Peng [0028] citation); and
generating weighted vertical location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the vertical location data for the corresponding source and a vertical weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”);
generating optimal x-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”);
generating optimal y-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”);
generating optimal vertical location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted vertical location data for the plurality of sources; and (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”)
setting the optimal x-axis horizontal location data, the optimal x-axis horizontal location data, and the optimal vertical location data as captured location data of the user device for the location-based service (Peng [0051] “The server 150, e.g., a cloud server, is configured to obtain and provide location estimates of the UE 105 to the external client 130. ”).
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-11, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being obvious over Peng et al. (US 20250151006 A1), hereinafter Peng, in view of Taylor, John R. "Error analysis." Univ. Science Books, Sausalito, California 20 (1997), hereinafter Taylor.
Claim 1: Regarding claim 1, Peng discloses the following [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:A method, comprising:
obtaining, from a plurality of sources, horizontal location data and vertical location data of a user device using a location-based service via a wireless communications network (Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) ”, further, Peng [0028] “For example, multiple locations of the UE may be determined based on reference signal measurements from multiple PRUs”);
for each corresponding source of the plurality of sources:
generating a horizontal weight for the corresponding source based on a horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
generating weighted horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the horizontal location data for the corresponding source and the horizontal weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”);
generating a vertical weight for the corresponding source based on a vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes. For the remainder of examination, all claims regarding horizontal, vertical, x-axis, y-axis, etc. will be considered obvious in reference to this definition of location data. )
generating weighted vertical location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of the vertical location data for the corresponding source and the vertical weight for the corresponding source (See above Peng [0029] citation for horizontal location data);
generating optimal horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”);
generating optimal vertical location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted vertical location data for the plurality of sources; and (Peng [0028] “The weighted measurements may be used to determine a location of the UE.”)
setting the optimal horizontal location data and the optimal vertical location data as captured location data of the user device for the location-based service (Peng [0051] “The server 150, e.g., a cloud server, is configured to obtain and provide location estimates of the UE 105 to the external client 130. ”).
Peng fails to disclose the limitations below. Taylor discloses:
generating a horizontal weight for the corresponding source based on a horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11, see below);
x
w
a
v
=
∑
w
i
x
i
∑
w
i
(7.10)
w
i
=
1
σ
i
2
(7.11)
Here,
x
w
a
v
is the weighted average of an observable,
w
i
is the weight of an observation, and
σ
i
is the error of the
i
t
h
observation. Eq. 7.10 is may be reformulated as:
x
w
a
v
=
w
1
∑
w
1
x
1
+
w
2
∑
w
2
x
2
+
…
+
w
n
∑
w
n
x
n
a
n
=
w
n
∑
w
i
x
w
a
v
=
a
1
x
1
+
a
2
x
2
+
…
+
a
n
x
n
Here,
a
n
is the weight applied to each observation
x
n
in the calculation of the weighted average. The weight
a
n
of the observation is divided by the sum of the weights of all of the observations
∑
w
i
such that
∑
a
i
=
1
, corresponding to the limitation “relative to a combined horizontal location uncertainty for the plurality of sources”.
generating a vertical weight for the corresponding source based on a vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources (See above Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11 citation);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. Peng teaches the measurement of horizontal and vertical locations by recording positions with X, Y, and Z coordinates with associated uncertainties, and therefore the uncertainty weighting of Taylor can be applied to the location data of Peng. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average location of a user device as disclosed by Peng utilize the sum of the weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average location of a user device with an associated uncertainty or confidence interval (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 2:
Regarding claim 2, Peng view of Taylor discloses the method of claim 1. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
generating an optimal horizontal location uncertainty of the optimal horizontal location (Peng [0101] “A position estimate may include an expected error or uncertainty (e.g., by including an area or volume within which the location is expected to be included with some specified or default level of confidence).”)
Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor discloses:
based on a combination of the horizontal location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Taylor Eq. 7.12, see below).
σ
w
a
v
=
1
∑
w
i
Here,
σ
w
a
v
is the uncertainty in the weighted average and
∑
w
i
is the sum of the horizontal uncertainties for the plurality of sources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to calculate an uncertainty of the determined optimal location utilizing the sum of the weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate an uncertainty of the weighted average location of a user device using the sum of the weights of the individual location measurements (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 3:
Regarding claim 3, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of claim 1. . Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
generating an optimal horizontal location uncertainty of the optimal horizontal location (Peng [0101] “A position estimate may include an expected error or uncertainty (e.g., by including an area or volume within which the location is expected to be included with some specified or default level of confidence).”)
Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor discloses:
based on a combination of the horizontal location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Taylor Eq. 7.12, see below).
σ
w
a
v
=
1
∑
w
i
Here,
σ
w
a
v
is the uncertainty in the weighted average and
∑
w
i
is the sum of the horizontal uncertainties for the plurality of sources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of generating an optimal device location using a weighted average by Peng include the generation of an uncertainty of the optimal device location as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average location of a user device with an associated uncertainty or confidence interval based on a combination of the uncertainties of the sources (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 4:
Regarding claim 4, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of claim 1. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
generating an optimal horizontal location uncertainty of the optimal horizontal location
generating an optimal vertical location uncertainty of the optimal vertical location
setting the optimal horizontal location uncertainty and the optimal vertical location uncertainty as part of the captured location data of the user device for the location-based service (Peng [0101] “A position estimate may include an expected error or uncertainty (e.g., by including an area or volume within which the location is expected to be included with some specified or default level of confidence).”, further, Peng [0051] “The server 150, e.g., a cloud server, is configured to obtain and provide location estimates of the UE 105 to the external client 130. ”).
Peng fails to disclose the limitations below. Taylor discloses:
based on a combination of the horizontal location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Taylor Eq. 7.12, see below).
σ
w
a
v
=
1
∑
w
i
(7.12)
Here,
σ
w
a
v
is the uncertainty in the weighted average and
∑
w
i
is the sum of the horizontal uncertainties for the plurality of sources.
based on a combination of the vertical location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Above Taylor Eq. 7.12 citation)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to calculate an uncertainty of the determined optimal (horizontal or vertical) location utilizing the sum of the weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate an uncertainty of the weighted average (horizontal or vertical) location of a user device using the sum of the weights of the individual (horizontal or vertical) location measurements (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 5:
Regarding claim 5, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of generating weighted horizontal location data of claim 1. Peng further discloses:
generating weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of x-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and the horizontal weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”); and
generating weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source based on a combination of y-axis horizontal location data for the corresponding source and the horizontal weight for the corresponding source (Peng [0029] “Positioning accuracy of a target user equipment based on reference signal measurements by multiple PRUs may be improved. For example, reference signal measurements from PRUs with unreliable locations may be ignored or heavily de-weighted.”, further, Peng [0043] “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined”).
Claim 6:
Regarding claim 6, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of generating optimal horizontal location data of claim 5. Peng further discloses
generating optimal x-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted x-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The UE may determine position uncertainties for the positions, and determine a final position as a weighted average of the multiple positions”); and
generating optimal y-axis horizontal location data for the user device based on a combination of the weighted y-axis horizontal location data for the plurality of sources (Peng [0028] “The UE may determine position uncertainties for the positions, and determine a final position as a weighted average of the multiple positions”).
Claim 7:
Regarding claim 7, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of claim 1. Peng further discloses:
causing the location-based service to use the captured location data of the user device (Peng [0040] “For example, such other devices may include internet of thing (IoT) devices, medical devices, home entertainment and/or automation devices, etc. The 5GC 140 may communicate with the external client 130 (e.g., a computer system), e.g., to allow the external client 130 to request and/or receive location information regarding the UE 105 (e.g., via the GMLC 125).”).
Claim 10:
Regarding claim 10, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 9. Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor discloses:
wherein the processor system is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:
generate a combined location uncertainty for the combined location data based on a combination of the location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Taylor Eq. 7.12, see below).
σ
w
a
v
=
1
∑
w
i
Here,
σ
w
a
v
is the uncertainty in the weighted average and
∑
w
i
is the sum of the horizontal uncertainties for the plurality of sources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to calculate an uncertainty of the determined optimal (horizontal or vertical) location utilizing the sum of the weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate an uncertainty of the weighted average (horizontal or vertical) location of a user device using the sum of the weights of the individual (horizontal or vertical) location measurements (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 11:
Regarding claim 11, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 9. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
wherein the processor system is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: generate a combined location uncertainty for the combined location data
set the combined location uncertainty as part of the captured location data of the user device for the location-based service (Peng [0101] “A position estimate may include an expected error or uncertainty (e.g., by including an area or volume within which the location is expected to be included with some specified or default level of confidence).”, further, Peng [0051] “The server 150, e.g., a cloud server, is configured to obtain and provide location estimates of the UE 105 to the external client 130. ”).
Peng fails to disclose the limitations below. Taylor discloses:
based on a combination of the location uncertainties for plurality of sources (Taylor Eq. 7.12, see below).
σ
w
a
v
=
1
∑
w
i
(7.12)
Here,
σ
w
a
v
is the uncertainty in the weighted average and
∑
w
i
is the sum of the horizontal uncertainties for the plurality of sources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to calculate an uncertainty of the determined optimal (horizontal or vertical) location utilizing the sum of the weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate an uncertainty of the weighted average (horizontal or vertical) location of a user device using the sum of the weights of the individual (horizontal or vertical) location measurements (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 17:
Regarding claim 17, Peng discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 18. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
wherein the computer instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform further actions, the further actions comprising: generating the vertical weight for the corresponding source based on a vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor teaches:
relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources (Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11, see below);
x
w
a
v
=
∑
w
i
x
i
∑
w
i
(7.10)
w
i
=
1
σ
i
2
(7.11)
Here,
x
w
a
v
is the weighted average of an observable,
w
i
is the weight of an observation, and
σ
i
is the error of the
i
t
h
observation. Eq. 7.10 is may be reformulated as:
x
w
a
v
=
w
1
∑
w
1
x
1
+
w
2
∑
w
2
x
2
+
…
+
w
n
∑
w
n
x
n
a
n
=
w
n
∑
w
i
x
w
a
v
=
a
1
x
1
+
a
2
x
2
+
…
+
a
n
x
n
Here,
a
n
is the weight applied to each observation
x
n
in the calculation of the weighted average. The weight
a
n
of the observation is divided by the sum of the weights of all of the observations
∑
w
i
such that
∑
a
i
=
1
, corresponding to the limitation “relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weight of a vertical location measurement as disclosed by Peng to utilize the sum of the weights of the vertical measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average vertical location of a user device with an associated vertical uncertainty or confidence interval (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 19:
Regarding claim 19, Peng discloses the medium of claim 18. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
wherein the computer instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform further actions, the further actions comprising: generating the vertical weight for the corresponding source based on a vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor teaches:
relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources. (Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11, see below);
x
w
a
v
=
∑
w
i
x
i
∑
w
i
(7.10)
w
i
=
1
σ
i
2
(7.11)
Here,
x
w
a
v
is the weighted average of an observable,
w
i
is the weight of an observation, and
σ
i
is the error of the
i
t
h
observation. Eq. 7.10 is may be reformulated as:
x
w
a
v
=
w
1
∑
w
1
x
1
+
w
2
∑
w
2
x
2
+
…
+
w
n
∑
w
n
x
n
a
n
=
w
n
∑
w
i
x
w
a
v
=
a
1
x
1
+
a
2
x
2
+
…
+
a
n
x
n
Here,
a
n
is the weight applied to each observation
x
n
in the calculation of the weighted average. The weight
a
n
of the observation is divided by the sum of the weights of all of the observations
∑
w
i
such that
∑
a
i
=
1
, corresponding to the limitation “relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of generating a weight for the vertical location measurement as disclosed by Peng utilize the sum of the weights of the vertical measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average vertical location of a user device with an associated uncertainty or confidence interval (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 20:
Regarding claim 20, Peng discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 18. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
wherein the computer instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform further actions, the further actions comprising: generating the y-axis horizontal weight for the corresponding source based on a y-axis horizontal location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Taylor teaches:
relative to a combined y-axis horizontal location uncertainty for the plurality of sources (Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11, see below);
x
w
a
v
=
∑
w
i
x
i
∑
w
i
(7.10)
w
i
=
1
σ
i
2
(7.11)
Here,
x
w
a
v
is the weighted average of an observable,
w
i
is the weight of an observation, and
σ
i
is the error of the
i
t
h
observation. Eq. 7.10 is may be reformulated as:
x
w
a
v
=
w
1
∑
w
1
x
1
+
w
2
∑
w
2
x
2
+
…
+
w
n
∑
w
n
x
n
a
n
=
w
n
∑
w
i
x
w
a
v
=
a
1
x
1
+
a
2
x
2
+
…
+
a
n
x
n
Here,
a
n
is the weight applied to each observation
x
n
in the calculation of the weighted average. The weight
a
n
of the observation is divided by the sum of the weights of all of the observations
∑
w
i
such that
∑
a
i
=
1
, corresponding to the limitation “relative to a combined y-axis horizontal location uncertainty for the plurality of sources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weighted average y-axis horizontal location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to utilize the sum of the y-axis horizontal weights of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average y-axis horizontal location of a user device with an associated y-axis horizontal uncertainty or confidence interval (See. Peng [0101]).
Claim 21:
Regarding claim 21, Peng discloses the non-transitory computer medium of claim 18. Peng further discloses [Note: what is not clearly disclosed is strike-through]:
wherein the computer instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform further actions, the further actions comprising:
generating the vertical weight for the corresponding source based on a vertical location uncertainty for the corresponding source (Peng [0028] “As another example, multiple reference signal measurements made by PRUs may be evaluated for likely accuracy, and multiple ones of the measurements selected and weighted (e.g., based on one or more factors indicative of likely accuracy of the corresponding measurements). ”, further, Peng [0043] supports location data being expressed in X, Y, Z coordinates, which would include both vertical / horizontal axes)
Peng fails to teach the limitation below. Taylor teaches:
relative to a combined vertical location uncertainty for the plurality of sources (Taylor Eqs. 7.10-7.11, see below);
x
w
a
v
=
∑
w
i
x
i
∑
w
i
(7.10)
w
i
=
1
σ
i
2
(7.11)
Here,
x
w
a
v
is the weighted average of an observable,
w
i
is the weight of an observation, and
σ
i
is the error of the
i
t
h
observation. Eq. 7.10 is may be reformulated as:
x
w
a
v
=
w
1
∑
w
1
x
1
+
w
2
∑
w
2
x
2
+
…
+
w
n
∑
w
n
x
n
a
n
=
w
n
∑
w
i
x
w
a
v
=
a
1
x
1
+
a
2
x
2
+
…
+
a
n
x
n
Here,
a
n
is the weight applied to each observation
x
n
in the calculation of the weighted average. The weight
a
n
of the observation is divided by the sum of the weights of all of the observations
∑
w
i
such that
∑
a
i
=
1
, corresponding to the limitation “relative to a combined horizontal location uncertainty for the plurality of sources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the features of Taylor into the invention of Peng. Peng is considered analogous art to the claimed invention as it discloses a location method for a user device, considering a weighted average of different location measurements. Taylor is a reference material regarding the calculation of weighted average of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to Peng and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of calculating a weight of a vertical location of a user device as disclosed by Peng to utilize the sum of the combined vertical location uncertainty of the measurements as disclosed by Taylor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the application would have been motivated to utilize the methods of Taylor to calculate a weighted average y-axis horizontal location of a user device with an associated y-axis horizontal uncertainty or confidence interval (See. Peng [0101]).
The claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over Peng et al. (US 20250151006 A1), hereinafter Peng, in view of Bao et al. (US 20220065979 A1), hereinafter Bao.
Claim 17:
Regarding claim 17, Peng discloses the computing device of claim 9. Peng fails to disclose the limitation below. Bao discloses:
wherein the processor system is configured to further execute the computer instructions to: forward the captured location data of the user device to emergency services as part of a 911 call made by the user device (Bao [0033] “Additionally or alternatively, the external client 180 may obtain and provide the location of UE 105 to an emergency services provider, government agency, etc.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Bao into the invention of Peng. Both Peng and Bao are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose method for locating user devices using a combination of reference signals with associated uncertainties. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as disclosed by Peng to forward the captured location data of the user device to emergency services as taught by Bao. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to automatically forward the location data upon a 911 call in order to, for example, locate a family member or provide a location to a government agency in the event of an emergency so that they may respond accordingly (Peng [0004], further Bao [0033]).
The claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over Peng et al. (US 20250151006 A1), hereinafter Peng, in view of Taylor, John R. "Error analysis." Univ. Science Books, Sausalito, California 20 (1997), hereinafter Taylor, further in view of Bao et al. (US 20220065979 A1), hereinafter Bao.
Claim 8:
Regarding claim 8, Peng in view of Taylor discloses the method of claim 1. Peng in view of Taylor fails to disclose the limitation below. Bao discloses:
forwarding the captured location data of the user device to emergency services as part of a 911 call made by the user device (Bao [0033] “Additionally or alternatively, the external client 180 may obtain and provide the location of UE 105 to an emergency services provider, government agency, etc.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Bao into the invention of Peng. Peng and Bao are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose method for locating user devices using a combination of reference signals with associated uncertainties. Taylor is a reference material describing methods for the calculation of observable quantities with associated uncertainties, and is directly applicable to the calculation of a weighed averages in Peng, Bao, and the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as disclosed by Peng to forward the captured location data of the user device to emergency services as taught by Bao. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to automatically forward the location data upon a 911 call in order to, for example, locate a family member or provide a location to a government agency in the event of an emergency so that they may respond accordingly (Peng [0004], further Bao [0033]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Marti et al. (US 20120309410 A1) describes a system whereby several anchors are used to determine the position of a mobile device, which is pertinent to the determination of the location of a user device using a weighted mean as described in the instant application. Lan et. al. (US 20260067992 A1) describes a process of automatically determining and reporting a user location when they initiate a call to emergency services, which is pertinent to the limitation in the claimed invention regarding 911 calls.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JAMES HALLORAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8643. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5pm.
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, Resha H. Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/Thomas James Halloran/
Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights