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 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
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.
1. Claims 21, 25-27, 31, and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan (2025/0274875) in view of Kazmi et al (2026/00468821).
Regarding claims 21 and 31. Raghavan teaches a method and a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising: a processor, wherein the processor is configured to (figure 3 – item 350 UAV comprises a processor 359):
determine non-transmit zone (NTZ) configuration information (figure 6, 0081-0082 – UAV receives NTZ configuration);
determine that the WTRU is approaching an NTZ area (figure 6, 0083 – UAV is approaching an NTZ area);
send, to a network node, a first notification message that indicates that the WTRU is approaching the NTZ area (figure 6, 0083 – UAV sends a proximity indication to the network and the network sends additional NTZ configuration to the UAV to apply the transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ during the first period of time);
apply an NTZ enforcement based on the NTZ configuration information upon entering the NTZ area (figure 6, 0083-0085 – UAV sends a proximity indication to the network and the network sends additional NTZ configuration to the UAV to apply the transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ during the first period of time);
Raghavan does not teach and a first time associated with entering the NTZ and determine a second time associated with the WTRU leaving the NTZ area; and send, to the network node, a second notification message indicating a second time associated with leaving the NTZ area.
Kazmi teaches the UAV determines that it is approaching the NTZ and notifies the network regarding UAV location and amount of time that it will be entering the NTZ (0069-0074) and the network performs cell change for the UAV (0087-0088), or the network controls one or more parameters related to beamforming at the UAV (0089-0091) or the network controls the UAV transmit power (0092-0095). UAV determines that the UAV is leaving the NTZ and notifies the network (0055, 0101, 0187-0188, 0200 – the indication indicates that the UAV is leaving the NTZ and time information, 0228-0229 – notify network the UAV is leaving the NTZ and time information, 0255-0257) and the network performs cell change for the UAV (0108-0115, 0189, 0201) or the network adjust the UE transmit power (0203-0204, 0260).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi to notify the network that the UAV leaving the NTZ in the next N seconds as taught by Kazmi thereby ensuring communication quality is not compromised (Kazmi at 0023-0024, 0027-0029), as well as, reducing interference (Kazmi at 0022).
Regarding claim 25. Raghavan teaches wherein the network node is associated with NTZ enforcement, wherein the processor is configured to determine the NTZ configuration information comprises the processor being configured to receive a configuration message from the network node, and wherein the configuration message indicates at least one of the NTZ configuration information (0081 – UAV receives NTZ configurations 610, 0083 – UAV receives additional NTZ configuration 615), an identifier associated with the WTRU, an identifier associated with a UAV, a cell in which NTZ enforcement applies, an NTZ area, a transition area, an NTZ policy, a restricted frequency, or a time period.
Regarding claims 26 and 36. Raghavan teaches wherein the configuration message further indicates one or more parameters associated with the NTZ enforcement, wherein the one or more parameters comprise at least one of: an indication of transmission blocking within a cell, an indication to reduce transmission power while in a transition area information (0081 – UAV receives NTZ configurations 610 regarding transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ, 0083 – UAV receives additional NTZ configuration 615 regarding transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ), an indication to search for communication paths permitted for use while in the NTZ area, an indication to update a flight path to avoid the NTZ area, or a condition on which to report cell information associated with the cell.
Regarding claims 27 and 37. Raghavan teaches wherein the configuration message further indicates one or more parameters associated with the NTZ enforcement, wherein the one or more parameters comprise at least one of: an indication of transmission blocking, full transmission blocking, partial transmission blocking, or occasional transmission blocking (0026 – UAV is not allowed to transmit signals with a power higher than a specified power and/or in a particular band if the UAV is within the NTZ … the UAV may provide information about a switch to another band to avoid the transmissions in the NTZ in the regulated and/or restricted frequency range, 0084).
2. Claims 22 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan in view of Kazmi further in view of Phuyal et al (2025/0267551).
Regarding claims 22 and 32. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach wherein the processor is configured to determine the NTZ configuration information by sending a registration request message to the network node, wherein the registration request message indicates an NTZ support capability.
Phuyal teaches the UAV sends a first message (e.g, registration request) to the network wherein the first message includes capability message (figure 2, item 210, 0108) wherein the capability message indicates that the UAV supports restrictions or is able to support compliance with restrictions while operating in the restricted geographic area. The UAV reports capability indicating whether the UAV supports other frequency bands besides the frequency bands that are not allowed within the restricted geographic area (0109-0111).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi to provide to the network UAV capability as taught by Phuyal thereby enabling the network to provide the UAV with an NTZ policy when the UAV in in the NTZ and remove the policy once the UAV leaves the NTZ.
3. Claims 23-24 and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan in view of Kazmi further in view of Skeba et al (2020/0317334).
Regarding claims 23 and 33. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach wherein the processor is configured to determine the NTZ configuration information by sending a request message to the network node, wherein the request message indicates a request for an NTZ policy from the network node.
Skeba teaches UAV includes a route planner (figure 1, item 118, 0020) which is used to request/negotiate with area controllers (108, 112, and 116 of figure 1) wherein the UAV sends a request for requesting what, if any, restrictions are imposed on the first restricted area 106 (0022) and receives a response from the network regarding the first restriction area 106 which enables the UAV to pass through the firs restriction area. The UAV then conveys a restriction compliance notice to the first area controller relating to the configuration of the UAV (0015, 0023-0025).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi to include the route planner in the UAV as taught by Skeba in order to enable the UAV the ability to request restrictions imposed on the first restricted area thereby enabling the UAV to comply with imposed restrictions as the UAV travels through the area (Skeba at 0013-0014).
Regarding claims 24 and 34. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to send an NTZ configuration response message to the network node, wherein the NTZ configuration response message indicates that the NTZ configuration information was received.
Skeba teaches UAV includes a route planner (figure 1, item 118, 0020) which is used to request/negotiate with area controllers (108, 112, and 116 of figure 1) wherein the UAV sends a request for requesting what, if any, restrictions are imposed on the first restricted area 106 (0022) and receives a response from the network regarding the first restriction area 106 which enables the UAV to pass through the firs restriction area. The UAV then conveys a restriction compliance notice to the first area controller relating to the configuration of the UAV (0015, 0023-0025).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi provide a compliance notice as taught by Skeba in order to enable the UAV to acknowledge restriction configurations have been received to the network thereby enabling the UAV to comply with imposed restrictions as the UAV travels through the area (Skeba at 0013-0014).
Regarding claim 35. Raghavan teaches wherein the network node is associated with NTZ enforcement, wherein the processor is configured to determine the NTZ configuration information comprises the processor being configured to receive a configuration message from the network node, and wherein the configuration message indicates at least one of the NTZ configuration information (0081 – UAV receives NTZ configurations 610 regarding transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ, 0083 – UAV receives additional NTZ configuration 615 regarding transmission power for the UAV within the NTZ), an identifier associated with the WTRU, an identifier associated with a UAV, a cell in which NTZ enforcement applies, an NTZ area, a transition area, an NTZ policy, a restricted frequency, or a time period.
4. Claims 28 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan in view of Kazmi further in view of Aleksiev (EP 4714836 A1).
Regarding claims 28 and 38. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach but Aleksiev teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: send an NTZ management request that indicates an NTZ requirement and a list of one or more WTRUs to send the NTZ configuration information, wherein the list of the one or more WTRUs comprises the WTRU (0056 – server subscribes to be notified when UAVs enter and leave NTZ the is provided a list of UEs that either moved in to the location area or moved out of the location area. The server checks if the UE identification is registered as UAS (UAV/UAV-C). The UAE-S sends NTZ request towards these UE clients/UAVs to indicate/force stopping of the transmission in the specific frequency and provides details of the geographical area, specific altitude for which the ZTZ is valid) ; and
receive an NTZ management response that indicates that the NTZ configuration information was provided to the WTRU (0056 – server subscribes to be notified when UAVs enter and leave NTZ the is provided a list of UEs that either moved in to the location area or moved out of the location area. The server checks if the UE identification is registered as UAS (UAV/UAV-C). The UAE-S sends NTZ request towards these UE clients/UAVs to indicate/force stopping of the transmission in the specific frequency and provides details of the geographical area, specific altitude for which the ZTZ is valid. The UE confirms the execution of this request with NTZ reply message).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi to provide the server with a list of UAVs entering and/or leaving NTZ as taught by Aleksiev in order to enable the server to send a NTZ request towards these UAVs to indicate/force stopping of the transmission in the specific frequency.
5. Claims 29 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan in view of Kazmi further in view of Kim et al (W0 2025/033818).
Regarding claims 29 and 39. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to send the configuration information to a lower layer of the WTRU using a command.
Kim teaches the UAV receives configuration information from the network (abstract) regarding NTZ operation. In case the areas are configured for NTZ operation, the UE applies the procedure as follows: When the UAV enters the area, perform SCG deactivation as specified in 5.3.5.13b if the SCG with NTZ frequency is activated; /CG > configure lower layers in to consider the Scell to be in deactivated sate if the Scell with NTZ frequency is activated; /Cell > configure lower layers to consider the radio resources to be deactivated or de-configured if the radio resources with NTZ frequency is activated or configured, respectively. When the UAV leaves the area, >perform SCG activation as specified in 5.3.5.13a if the SCG with NTZ frequency is deactivated; >configure lower layers to consider the Scell to be in activated state if the Scell with NTZ frequency is deactivated; > configure lower layers to consider the radio resources to be activated or configured if the radio resource with NTZ frequency has been deactivated or de-configured, respectively ([521] – [552]). For example, deactivation of CG/cell/TRP is performed quickly during NTZ zone entering to satisfy ECC requirements, but performance can be guaranteed by performing quick activation of CG/cell/TRP during leaving. In other words, when entering NTZ, the wireless device could deactivate CG/cell/TRP by itself. Therefore, resources can be used efficiently, while following the ECC restriction ([17] – [18]). The present disclosure can have advantageous effects. A wireless device could efficiently perform area dependent cell deactivation. For example, deactivation of CG/Cell/TRP is performed quickly during NTZ zone entering to satisfy ECC requirements, but performance can be guaranteed by performing quick activation of CG/Cell/TRP during leaving ([658] – [662]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi to provide configuration information to the UAV and the UAV configures the lower layers for considering entering and leaving NTZ zone(s) as taught by Kim which enables the UAV to quickly deactivate CG/cell/TRP during NTZ zone entering to satisfy ECC requirements, but performance can be guaranteed by performing quick activation of CG/cell/TRP during leaving NTZ.
6. Claims 30 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan in view of Kazmi further in view of Ashoori et al (2016/0291589).
Regarding claims 30 and 40. Raghavan in view of Kazmi do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to: send an indication that the WTRU will be subject to NTZ enforcement; and deactivate a service for the WTRU while the WTRU is subject to NTZ enforcement.
Ashoori teaches send an indication that the UAV is subject to NTZ enforcement (0095 – send/broadcast “UAV 23-417, camera off”) and the UAV deactivates the camera service while the UAV is in the restricted region).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kazmi in view of Kazmi to send an indication “UAV 23-417, camera off” as taught by Ashoori enabling the network the ability to turn off the camera/imaging service of the UAV while the UAV is in the restricted region (e.g., NTZ).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
---(2024/0397512) Liu et al teaches the UAV sends a request to be configured for NTZ (0029).
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARRY W TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-7509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 7-5.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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.
/BARRY W TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights