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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 12/30/2024, 03/11/2025 and 07/27/2026 been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 1 of claim 12, replace “claim 8” with -- claim 9 --, or on line 2 of claim 12 replace “the plurality” with -- a plurality --;
On line 1 of claim 19, replace “claim 15” with -- claim 16 --, or on line 2 of claim 16 replace “the plurality” with -- a plurality --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stewart (US 20160182174 A1).
Consider claim 1, Stewart discloses a television (TV) signal receiver (read as device 700, a television that includes DVB-T2 receiver 710, figure 7, par [0027]), comprising:
a radio-frequency (RF) receiver circuit configured to receive a plurality of broadcast TV signals from a corresponding plurality of TV signal transmitters (read as DVT-T2 receiver 710 receiving broadcast DVB-T2 signal 701 through an antenna and implementing the figure 6 method for DTV receiver 210, which receives signals 201-1 through 201-4 from broadcasters 200-1 through 200-4, respectively; with the DVT-T2 receiver 710 and the DTV front-end as the RF receiver circuit, figures 5-7, par [0023]-[0024] and [0027]); and
a control circuit configured to (read as processor 760, a stored-program control processor, executing the figure 6 software stored in memory 765, figure 5, par [0027]):
determine a plurality of propagation delays for the received plurality of broadcast TV signals, respectively (read as the processor 760 executing the figure 6 software to determine, for each received signal from its corresponding transmitter, the time differential Ti – ti between reception time Ti and transmission time ti; using ρi = c(Ti – ti) as the distance between the corresponding transmitter and receiver and correct receiver buffering or progressing delay, so the intervale from transmission to reception corresponds to the respective propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0025]-[0027]);
determine a location of the TV signal receiver based on a time-of-arrival (TOA) of the plurality of broadcast TV signals and the plurality of propagation delays, respectively (read as measure reception time Ti for each corresponding transmitter and that tuning multiple channels provides multiple time of arrival estimates, and determine each corresponding time differential Ti – ti and ρi = c(Ti – ti), then ues the indexed ρi values in the equations that solve receiver coordinates x, y, z and possible error b; thus, the location is determined based on each broadcast signal’s time of arrival and corresponding propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0024]-[0025] and [0027]-[0028]).
Consider claim 8, Stewart discloses a method performed by a television (TV) signal receiver for supporting broadcast positioning service (BPS) (read as the figure 6 method use in DTV receiver 210, which implements a geolocation feature from received broadcast TV signals, figure 6, par [0017] and [0024]) comprising:
receiving a plurality of broadcast TV signals from a corresponding plurality of TV signal transmitters (read as DVT-T2 receiver 710 receiving broadcast DVB-T2 signal 701 through an antenna and implementing the figure 6 method for DTV receiver 210, which receives signals 201-1 through 201-4 from broadcasters 200-1 through 200-4, respectively; with the DVT-T2 receiver 710 and the DTV front-end as the RF receiver circuit, figures 5-7, par [0023]-[0024] and [0027]);
determining a plurality of propagation delays for the received plurality of broadcast TV signals, respectively (read as the processor 760 executing the figure 6 software to determine, for each received signal from its corresponding transmitter, the time differential Ti – ti between reception time Ti and transmission time ti; using ρi = c(Ti – ti) as the distance between the corresponding transmitter and receiver and correct receiver buffering or progressing delay, so the intervale from transmission to reception corresponds to the respective propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0025]-[0027]); and
determining a location of the TV signal receiver based on a time-of-arrival (TOA) of the plurality of broadcast TV signals and the plurality of propagation delays, respectively (read as measure reception time Ti for each corresponding transmitter and that tuning multiple channels provides multiple time of arrival estimates, and determine each corresponding time differential Ti – ti and ρi = c(Ti – ti), then ues the indexed ρi values in the equations that solve receiver coordinates x, y, z and possible error b; thus, the location is determined based on each broadcast signal’s time of arrival and corresponding propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0024]-[0025] and [0027]-[0028]).
Consider claim 15, Stewart discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor device, cause the processor device to (read as device 700, a television that includes DVB-T2 receiver 710, with processor 760, a stored-program control processor, executing the figure 6 software stored in memory 765, figures 5 and 7, par [0027]):
receive a plurality of broadcast television (TV) signals from a corresponding plurality of TV signal transmitters (read as DVT-T2 receiver 710 receiving broadcast DVB-T2 signal 701 through an antenna and implementing the figure 6 method for DTV receiver 210, which receives signals 201-1 through 201-4 from broadcasters 200-1 through 200-4, respectively; with the DVT-T2 receiver 710 and the DTV front-end as the RF receiver circuit, figures 5-7, par [0023]-[0024] and [0027]);
determine a plurality of propagation delays for the received plurality of broadcast TV signals, respectively (read as the processor 760 executing the figure 6 software to determine, for each received signal from its corresponding transmitter, the time differential Ti – ti between reception time Ti and transmission time ti; using ρi = c(Ti – ti) as the distance between the corresponding transmitter and receiver and correct receiver buffering or progressing delay, so the intervale from transmission to reception corresponds to the respective propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0025]-[0027]); and
determine a location of a TV signal receiver based on a time-of-arrival (TOA) of the plurality of broadcast TV signals and the plurality of propagation delays, respectively (read as measure reception time Ti for each corresponding transmitter and that tuning multiple channels provides multiple time of arrival estimates, and determine each corresponding time differential Ti – ti and ρi = c(Ti – ti), then use the indexed ρi values in the equations that solve receiver coordinates x, y, z and possible error b; thus, the location is determined based on each broadcast signal’s time of arrival and corresponding propagation delay estimate, figures 6-7, par [0024]-[0025] and [0027]-[0028]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 12-13 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart (US 20160182174 A1) of Pattabiraman et al. (U.S 20100073229 A1).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 8 above, Stewart discloses the plurality of communication frames further comprise measurement for each of one or more TV signal transmitters of the plurality of TV signal transmitters (read as T2 frames whose data symbols carry the Network Information Table (NIT) and Cell List Descriptor 110, which includes altitude, latitude and longitude fields for each transmitter; each broadcaster transmit that descriptor and DTV receiver 210 receives it for the respective channels, par [0018], [0020] and [0023]-[0024]); and the measurements for each TV signal transmitter of the one or more TV signal transmitters comprise one or more of a tower location, an antenna pattern, a bootstrap timing offset, and a transmit power level for the TV signal transmitter and for one or more neighboring TV signal transmitters of the TV signal transmitter (read as the altitude, latitude and longitude fields as the geocentric coordinates of the corresponding transmitter, figures 3 and 6, par [0020] and [0025]) but does not specifically disclose the measurements as neighboring measurements.
Nonetheless, Pattabiraman discloses transmitting neighboring towers assistant information, which each beacon transmitting a data stream of embedded assistance data that includes Geocode data (Latitude, Longitude and Altitude) of the towers and geocode information about the adjacent towers; the further disclose the digital or analog TV positioning signals and neighboring towers broadcasting position information about towers in the vicinity, figure 2, par [0049], [0052], [0063] and [0078].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pattabiraman into the teachings of Stewart, to configure Stewart’s Cell List Descriptor signaling to include Pattabiraman’s adjacent towers geocodes, in order to maintain access to adjacent/neighboring transmitter coordinates through neighboring broadcast assistance when a particular tower’s own data is unavailable (see par [0078] of Pattabiraman).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 12 above, Stewart, as modified by Pattabiraman, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose validating the location of the TV signal receiver based on the neighbor measurements.
Nonetheless, Pattabiraman further discloses position quality and integrity checks, which the geocode information about adjacent towers, and uses transmitter locations (xi, yi, zi) to compute a fix, evaluates the position estimates using a position quality metric based on pseudo-range residuals and geometry of the towers relative to the estimated position, and performs receiver integrity monitoring based on a check of consistency of measurements is used to eliminate "outlier" measurements; the geocodes identity the transmitter positions that define the tower geometry, so these position quality and integrity checks corresponds to validating the estimated receiver location based in part on the neighboring measurements, par [0052], [0159], [0168] and [0109]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Pattabiraman into the teachings of Stewart, which modified by Pattabiraman, to configure Stewart’s receiver location calculation using Pattabiraman’s position quality metrics and receiver integrity monitoring, in order to asses the calculated location using tower geometry and eliminate outlier measurements that may result from synchronization loss or multipath (see par [0168] and [0179]).
Consider claim 19, as applied to claim 15 above, Stewart discloses the plurality of communication frames further comprise measurement for each of one or more TV signal transmitters of the plurality of TV signal transmitters (read as T2 frames whose data symbols carry the Network Information Table (NIT) and Cell List Descriptor 110, which includes altitude, latitude and longitude fields for each transmitter; each broadcaster transmit that descriptor and DTV receiver 210 receives it for the respective channels, par [0018], [0020] and [0023]-[0024]); and the measurements for each TV signal transmitter of the one or more TV signal transmitters comprise one or more of a tower location, an antenna pattern, a bootstrap timing offset, and a transmit power level for the TV signal transmitter and for one or more neighboring TV signal transmitters of the TV signal transmitter (read as the altitude, latitude and longitude fields as the geocentric coordinates of the corresponding transmitter, figures 3 and 6, par [0020] and [0025]) but does not specifically disclose the measurements as neighboring measurements.
Nonetheless, Pattabiraman discloses transmitting neighboring towers assistant information, which each beacon transmitting a data stream of embedded assistance data that includes Geocode data (Latitude, Longitude and Altitude) of the towers and geocode information about the adjacent towers; the further disclose the digital or analog TV positioning signals and neighboring towers broadcasting position information about towers in the vicinity, figure 2, par [0049], [0052], [0063] and [0078].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pattabiraman into the teachings of Stewart, to configure Stewart’s Cell List Descriptor signaling to include Pattabiraman’s adjacent towers geocodes, in order to maintain access to adjacent/neighboring transmitter coordinates through neighboring broadcast assistance when a particular tower’s own data is unavailable (see par [0078] of Pattabiraman).
Consider claim 20, as applied to claim 19 above, Stewart, as modified by Pattabiraman, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose validating the location of the TV signal receiver based on the neighbor measurements.
Nonetheless, Pattabiraman further discloses position quality and integrity checks, which the geocode information about adjacent towers, and uses transmitter locations (xi, yi, zi) to compute a fix, evaluates the position estimates using a position quality metric based on pseudo-range residuals and geometry of the towers relative to the estimated position, and performs receiver integrity monitoring based on a check of consistency of measurements is used to eliminate "outlier" measurements; the geocodes identity the transmitter positions that define the tower geometry, so these position quality and integrity checks corresponds to validating the estimated receiver location based in part on the neighboring measurements, par [0052], [0159], [0168] and [0109]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Pattabiraman into the teachings of Stewart, which modified by Pattabiraman, to configure Stewart’s receiver location calculation using Pattabiraman’s position quality metrics and receiver integrity monitoring, in order to asses the calculated location using tower geometry and eliminate outlier measurements that may result from synchronization loss or multipath (see par [0168] and [0179]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 9-11, 14, 16-18 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights