CTNF 18/895,661 CTNF 96878 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims This action is in reply to the application filed on 09/25/2024. Claims 1-30 are currently pending and have been examined. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: A minor typographical error appears in “more transceivers,, from”. The Examiner will disregard the duplicate comma for the purposes of this examination . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1 and 28, and therefore dependent claims 2-13 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the one or more measurements and image information". However, claim 1 only previously recites “obtain one or more measurements of sensing signals” with no prior mention of “image information”. It is therefore unclear which “image information” is being referred to. For the purposes of this Examination, the Examiner will interpret "the one or more measurements and image information" as "the one or more measurements and an image information". The same or similar reasoning and interpretation is applied to claim 28. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1-10, 13, and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takahashi (US 20250106710 A1), hereinafter Takahashi . Regarding claim 1 , Takahashi discloses a sensing node, comprising: one or more memories (See at least [0107] “UE 150 may include: at least one processor; and at least one memory”) ; one or more transceivers (See at least [0107] “the UE 150 may generate and transmit and receive RRC”, [0125] “UE 150 deployed at or near a home may be used as a sensing signal transmitter, sensing signal receiver, or both”) ; and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories and the one or more transceivers, the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, configured to (See at least [0107] “UE 150 may include: at least one processor; and at least one memory”, [0125] “UE 150 deployed at or near a home may be used as a sensing signal transmitter, sensing signal receiver, or both”) : obtain one or more measurements of sensing signals reflected from a target object while the sensing node performs sensing operations in an ambient environment (See at least [0125] “As shown in FIG. 5, a sensing signal is transmitted and, when it is reflected off a reflector, such as a moving person, the reflected signal may have a frequency, phase, amplitude, or time of flight (ToF) that is different from those of a reference reflected signal or a baseline reflected signal. The different reflected signal characteristics may be sensed as sensed data”) ; and transmit, via the one or more transceivers, the one or more measurements and image information obtained at the sensing node indicative of ambient environment factors affecting the one or more measurements (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map”, [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) . Regarding claim 2 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the ambient environment factors affecting the one or more measurements, include objects in the ambient environment, obstructions in the ambient environment, environmental conditions of the ambient environment, or a combination thereof (See at least [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) Regarding claim 3 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the sensing node comprises: a user equipment (UE); a hand-held device; a network node; a transmission-reception point (TRP); a roadside unit (RSU); or a base station (See at least Fig. 4, [0124] “UEs in the target area to be 3D-mapped can be involved in producing sensed data in the manner illustrated in FIG. 4”) Regarding claim 4 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the one or more measurements and image information are provided to: a base station; a network server; or a sensing management function (SnMF) (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map”) Regarding claim 5 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the image information obtained at the sensing node comprises: video; static images; or a combination thereof (See at least [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) Regarding claim 6 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: transmitting an indication of a location of one or more antennas used to obtain the one or more measurements; a receiver, of multiple receivers, used to obtain the one or more measurements; an orientation of the one or more antennas used to obtain the one or more measurements; or a combination thereof (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that UEs 150 (receivers) transmit communication signals which are indications of the receivers.) Regarding claim 7 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to transmit, via the one or more transceivers, an indication of a mode of operation of the sensing node (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that UEs 150 (receivers) transmit communication signals which are indications of a sensing mode of operation.) Regarding claim 8 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 7. Takahashi additionally discloses the mode of operation is based on a folded state of the sensing node; an orientation of a hand of a user operating the sensing node; a receiver, of multiple receivers, used to obtain the one or more measurements of sensing signals reflected from the target object; a disposition of one or more image acquisition devices of the sensing node; or any combination thereof (See at least Fig. 4, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that UEs 150 (receivers) transmit communication signals which are indications of a sensing mode of operation dependent on reflected signals.) Regarding claim 9 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: transmit, via the one or more transceivers, an indication of a time at which the image information was obtained at the sensing node (See at least [0125] “the reflected signal may have a frequency, phase, amplitude, or time of flight (ToF) that is different from those of a reference reflected signal or a baseline reflected signal. The different reflected signal characteristics may be sensed as sensed data”, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map”) Regarding claim 10 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9. Takahashi additionally discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: determine a time difference between a time stamp associated with the image information and a time at which corresponding sensing signal measurements were obtained; and transmit, via the one or more transceivers, the image information based on the time difference falling within a threshold time difference (See at least [0125] “the reflected signal may have a frequency, phase, amplitude, or time of flight (ToF) that is different from those of a reference reflected signal or a baseline reflected signal. The different reflected signal characteristics may be sensed as sensed data”, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that the threshold time difference corresponds to a difference resulting in a detection.) Regarding claim 13 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi additionally discloses transmission of the image information by the sensing node is based on: one or more sensing signal transmission criterion implemented at the sensing node; a periodic time period implemented at the sensing node; scheduled times as indicated at the sensing node; one or more events detected by the sensing node; a request received at the sensing node from a network server; or any combination thereof (See at least [0122] “the UEs 150 may be called upon by the SeMF to provide sensed data”) Regarding claim 28 , applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 1. Accordingly, claim 28 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 1, shown above. Regarding claim 29 , applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 2. Accordingly, claim 29 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi, in view of Zhang (US 20220091227 A1), hereinafter Zhang . Regarding claim 11 , Takahashi, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Takahashi further discloses transmit, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measured during performance of the sensing operations (See at least [0123] “UEs in certain location areas to generate and report sensed data (e.g., relating to a UAV position, velocity”) . Takahashi does not explicitly disclose transmit, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measured during performance of the sensing operations . However, Zhang, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses transmit, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measured during performance of the sensing operations (See at least [0081] “a radar device may also be used to detect the velocity and direction of a using the FMCW”) . Furthermore, 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 sensing node system disclosed by Takahashi with the FMCW system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously avoid interference through coordination (See at least [0083] “radar devices may communicate with each other based on a transmission timing and/or one or more FMCW waveform parameters. This may enable radar devices to leverage other radar devices' radar transmissions for object/target detection, and may also reduce interferences”) . Regarding claim 12 , the combination of Takahashi and Zhang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11. Takahashi does not disclose the velocity or distance measurements include an indication of a velocity of the target object based on at least one Doppler measurement of the at least one FMCW signal; an indication of a position of the target object based on at least one measurement of the at least one FMCW; or any combination thereof. However, Zhang further discloses the velocity or distance measurements include an indication of a velocity of the target object based on at least one Doppler measurement of the at least one FMCW signal; an indication of a position of the target object based on at least one measurement of the at least one FMCW; or any combination thereof (See at least [0081] “a radar device may also be used to detect the velocity and direction of a using the FMCW […] The FMCW receiver may also be able to identify the velocity based on a Doppler spectrum”) . Furthermore, 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 sensing node system disclosed by Takahashi with the FMCW system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously avoid interference through coordination (See at least [0083] “radar devices may communicate with each other based on a transmission timing and/or one or more FMCW waveform parameters. This may enable radar devices to leverage other radar devices' radar transmissions for object/target detection, and may also reduce interferences”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 14-19, 21-24, 27, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi (US 20250106710 A1), in view of Slobodyanyuk (US 20210096215 A1), hereinafter Slobodyanyuk . Regarding claim 14 , Takahashi, as shown below, discloses a network node system comprising the following limitations: one or more memories (See at least [0104] “network node […] e.g., an apparatus with at least one processor and/or at least one memory with processor-readable instructions”) ; one or more transceivers (See at least [0126] “RAN (e.g., a network node) transmits a sensing signal and the UE(s) receives the sensing signal to obtain sensed data; and/or the UE transmits a sensing signal and RAN (e.g., a network node) receives it to obtain sensed data”) ; and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories and the one or more transceivers, the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, configured to (See at least [0330] “The memory 1550 includes processor-readable instructions that are executable by the processor 1550 to cause the apparatus to perform various operations, including those mentioned herein, such as the operations of FIGS. 3-14C.”) : receive, via the one or more transceivers,, from a sensing node, sensing signal measurements and image information obtained at the sensing node while the sensing node performs sensing operations in an ambient environment, wherein the image information is indicative of ambient environment factors affecting the sensing signal measurements (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map”, [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) ; and Takahashi does not explicitly disclose perform at least one calibration operation associated with the sensing signal measurements based on the image information. However, Slobodyanyuk, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses: perform at least one calibration operation associated with the sensing signal measurements based on the image information (See at least [0087] “For example, the calibration characteristics may include a location, size, shape, color, a particular visual image, a three-dimensional (3D) profile, and the like […] the described techniques are used for calibrating a RADAR sensor, the RADAR sensor may be calibrated […] actively (e.g., where the calibration object 225 processes the transmitted radar signal and transmits a responsive RADAR signal that is based on the RADAR signal received by the calibration object 225)”) Furthermore, 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 network node system disclosed by Takahashi with the calibration operation disclosed by Slobodyanyuk. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously ensure accuracy and thereby improve safety (See at least [0004] “This may ensure that the calibration accuracy, e.g., in the situation where sensor(s) drift or otherwise suddenly become out of tolerance, of the vehicle sensor system remains within the acceptable tolerance range, which may mitigate or avoid a dangerous situation for the vehicle, other vehicles, pedestrians, infrastructure, etc.”) . Regarding claim 15 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses the ambient environment factors affecting the one or more measurements, include objects in the ambient environment, obstructions in the ambient environment, environmental conditions of the ambient environment, or a combination thereof (See at least [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) Regarding claim 16 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses the network node comprises: a base station; a transmission-reception point (TRP); or a sensing management function (SnMF) (See at least Fig. 4, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map.” Takahashi discloses a network node as a base station) . Regarding claim 17 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses the one or more measurements and image information is received from a user equipment (UE); a hand-held device; a transmission-reception point (TRP); a roadside unit (RSU); or a base station (See at least Fig. 4, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map.”) . Regarding claim 18 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses the image information received from the sensing node comprises: video; static images; or a combination thereof (See at least [0121] “With sufficient amounts of sensed data, an application may, for example, use sensed data to obtain awareness of a scene surrounding a user equipment, to detect, localize, and track objects, and/or to form images”) . Regarding claim 19 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses receiving, from the sensing node, an indication of a location of one or more antennas used by the sensing node to obtain the sensing signal measurements; an orientation of the one or more antennas used by the sensing node to obtain the sensing signal measurements; or any combination thereof (See at least [0123] “authorize RAN entities and UEs in certain location areas to generate and report sensed data” Takahashi discloses data reporting from certain locations as an indication of a location of UEs) . Regarding claim 21 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing node, an indication of a mode of operation of the sensing node (See at least [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that UEs 150 (receivers) transmit communication signals which are indications of a sensing mode of operation.) . Regarding claim 22 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 14 and 21. Takahashi further discloses the mode of operation is based on a folded state of the sensing node; an orientation of a hand of a user operating the sensing node; a receiver, of multiple receivers, used to obtain the one or more measurements; a disposition of one or more image acquisition devices of the sensing node; or any combination thereof (See at least Fig. 4, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that UEs 150 (receivers) transmit communication signals which are indications of a sensing mode of operation dependent on reflected signals.) . Regarding claim 23 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing node, an indication of a time at which the image information was obtained at the sensing node (See at least [0125] “the reflected signal may have a frequency, phase, amplitude, or time of flight (ToF) that is different from those of a reference reflected signal or a baseline reflected signal. The different reflected signal characteristics may be sensed as sensed data”, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map”) . Regarding claim 24 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 23 and 14. Takahashi further discloses determine a time difference based on the time at which the image information was obtained at the sensing node and a time at which corresponding sensing signal measurements were obtained at the sensing node (See at least [0125] “the reflected signal may have a frequency, phase, amplitude, or time of flight (ToF) that is different from those of a reference reflected signal or a baseline reflected signal. The different reflected signal characteristics may be sensed as sensed data”, [0124] “The sensed data may be transmitted by the UEs 150 to the network nodes 401 in communication signals, to be used by a service consumer of the SeMF to produce or modify a spatial map” The Examiner notes that the threshold time difference corresponds to a difference resulting in a detection.) ; and Takahashi does not explicitly disclose the at least one calibration operation is based on the time falling within a threshold time difference. However, Slobodyanyuk, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses: the at least one calibration operation is based on the time falling within a threshold time difference (See at least [0087] “For example, the calibration characteristics may include a location, size, shape, color, a particular visual image, a three-dimensional (3D) profile, and the like […] the described techniques are used for calibrating a RADAR sensor, the RADAR sensor may be calibrated […] actively (e.g., where the calibration object 225 processes the transmitted radar signal and transmits a responsive RADAR signal that is based on the RADAR signal received by the calibration object 225)” Slobodyanyuk discloses performing calibration as a result of a detection, which corresponds to a time difference threshold for detection disclosed by Takahashi) Furthermore, 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 network node system disclosed by Takahashi with the calibration operation disclosed by Slobodyanyuk. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously ensure accuracy and thereby improve safety (See at least [0004] “This may ensure that the calibration accuracy, e.g., in the situation where sensor(s) drift or otherwise suddenly become out of tolerance, of the vehicle sensor system remains within the acceptable tolerance range, which may mitigate or avoid a dangerous situation for the vehicle, other vehicles, pedestrians, infrastructure, etc.”) . Regarding claim 27 , the combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses transmission of the sensing signal measurements and image information from the sensing node is based on: one or more sensing signal transmission criterion implemented at the sensing node; a periodic time period implemented at the sensing node; scheduled times as implemented at the sensing node; one or more events detected by the sensing node; a request transmitted by the network node to the sensing node; or any combination thereof (See at least [0122] “the UEs 150 may be called upon by the SeMF to provide sensed data”) . Regarding claim 30 , applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 14. Accordingly, claim 30 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 14, shown above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi, in view of Slobodyanyuk, in further view of Jeon (US 20230076874 A1), hereinafter Jeon . Regarding claim 20 , The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 14. The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk does not explicitly disclose the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing node, a location of one or more antennas of the sensing node used to obtain the one or more measurements; an orientation of the one or more antennas of the sensing node used to obtain the one or more measurements; or a combination thereof. However, Jeon, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: receive, via the one or more transceivers, from the sensing node, a location of one or more antennas of the sensing node used to obtain the one or more measurements; an orientation of the one or more antennas of the sensing node used to obtain the one or more measurements; or a combination thereof (See at least Fig. 6, [0426] “the UE reports desired sensing application (and possible the UE's location) to the BS”, [0399] “UE 116 includes an antenna 301”) . Furthermore, 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 network node system disclosed by Takahashi with the calibration operation disclosed by Slobodyanyuk with the reporting system disclosed by Jeon. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously mitigate interference and improve efficiency (See at least [0212] “need to ensure time/frequency/sequence/spatial resources are efficiently used across communication and sensing modules of a same UE, as well as among different UEs performing these two operations, to reduce/avoid (self-) interference”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi, in view of Slobodyanyuk, in further view of Zhang . Regarding claim 25 , The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Takahashi further discloses receive, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measurement (See at least [0123] “UEs in certain location areas to generate and report sensed data (e.g., relating to a UAV position, velocity”) . The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk does not explicitly disclose receive, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measurement . However, Zhang, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses receive, via the one or more transceivers, velocity or distance measurements based on at least one frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) signal measurement (See at least [0081] “a radar device may also be used to detect the velocity and direction of a using the FMCW”) . Furthermore, 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 sensing node system disclosed by Takahashi with the calibration operation disclosed by Slobodyanyuk with the FMCW system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously avoid interference through coordination (See at least [0083] “radar devices may communicate with each other based on a transmission timing and/or one or more FMCW waveform parameters. This may enable radar devices to leverage other radar devices' radar transmissions for object/target detection, and may also reduce interferences”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi, in view of Slobodyanyuk, in further view of Shaw (US 20250370092 A1), hereinafter Shaw . Regarding claim 26 , The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 14. The combination of Takahashi and Slobodyanyuk does not explicitly disclose the at least one calibration operation is based on detection of a rogue entity interfering with the sensing signal measurements. However, Shaw, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses the at least one calibration operation is based on detection of a rogue entity interfering with the sensing signal measurements (See at least [0032] “perform various calibration operations to identify and mitigate various components of interference experienced by device 300. In various embodiments, such interference may include over-the-air leakage, on chip-leakage as well as reflected signals from static objects that are not of interest for a radar mode of operation.”) . Furthermore, 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 network node system disclosed by Takahashi with the calibration operation disclosed by Slobodyanyuk with the calibration interference system disclosed by Shaw. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve accuracy and efficacy of interference mitigation (See at least [0019] “interference cancellation operations may be performed at one or more locations along the receive chain to improve the accuracy and efficacy of interference mitigation and radar operations”) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Merwaday (US 20260067916 A1) - An apparatus of a communication device, the apparatus may include: an interface configured to transmit a sensing signal and receive a reflected sensing signal; and a processor configured to: determine a sensing signal configuration of a further communication device; estimate a sensing interference of the further communication device based on the sensing signal configuration; and perform an interference cancellation on the reflected sensing signal using the sensing interference. Leng (US 20250175770 A1) - Example embodiments of the present disclosure relate to sensing a dynamic area on request. In an example method, a core network device receives a sensing request from a terminal device. The sensing request indicates an initial sensing area and a change tendency of the initial sensing area. The core network device transmits a sensing instruction to an access network device. The sensing instruction instructs the access network device to sense a target sensing area determined based on the initial sensing area and the change tendency. The core network device receives a sensing result of the target sensing area from the access network device. The core network device transmits a sensing response to the terminal device. The sensing response is determined based on the sensing result. In this way, resource utilization efficiency of sensing of a network device is improved and impact on communication performance of the network device is reduced. Manela (US 20250110230 A1) - Example embodiments relate techniques and systems for generating multi-axis radar velocity images using stereo radar. A vehicle radar system receives radar first radar data from a first radar and second radar data from a second radar, which are coupled at different locations on a vehicle traveling in an environment. The system determines a first radial speed and a second radial speed for an object based on the first and second radar data, respectively, and then estimates a velocity vector for the object relative to the vehicle based on the first and second radial speeds. The system can provide the estimated velocity vector as an input into a neural network and enable vehicle systems to control the vehicle based on the output from the neural network. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH W GOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-4186. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu 7:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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 on (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. /KENNETH W GOOD/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 2 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 3 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 4 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 5 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 6 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 7 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 8 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 9 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 10 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 11 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 12 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 13 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 14 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 15 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 16 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 17 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 18 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 19 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 20 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 21 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 22 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 23 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/895,661 Page 24 Art Unit: 3648
Prosecution Insights