Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/919,003

METHOD FOR SENDING POSITIONING REFERENCE SIGNAL, TERMINAL, AND NETWORK DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 17, 2024
Priority
Apr 24, 2022 — continuation of PCTCN2022088851
Examiner
CRIGLER, RYAN ALEXANDER
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allowance Rate
2 granted / 2 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
14
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
62.3%
+22.3% vs TC avg
§102
30.4%
-9.6% vs TC avg
§112
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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)(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. Claims 1-17, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bao et al. (US 20220110088 A1), hereinafter Bao . Claim 1 is rejected as a method of claim 9. Claim 2 is rejected as a method of claim 10. Claim 3 is rejected as a method of claim 11. Claim 4 is rejected as a method of claim 12. Claim 5 is rejected as a method of claim 13. Claim 6 is rejected as a method of claim 14. Claim 7 is rejected as a method of claim 15. Claim 8 is rejected as a method of claim 16. Regarding claim 9, Bao teaches, A first terminal, comprising: a processor; and (Figure 2, label 210, paragraph 0058) a transceiver connected to the processor; and (Figure 2, labels 214, 240, 25, paragraph 0058) a memory storing one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the first terminal to: (Figure 2, label 211, paragraph 0058) send a first-type sidelink PRS (SL-PRS) or a second-type SL-PRS, wherein the first-type SL-PRS is an SL-PRS separately sent, and the second-type SL-PRS is an SL-PRS associated with a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH)/physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH). (Figure 9, label 921, paragraph 0111 – The UE (label 700) sends a reference signal that contains SL-PRS. Paragraph 0112 - The UE may use as a reference signal a PSCCH signal). Regarding claim 10, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 9, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the first terminal to: send the first-type SL-PRS or the second-type SL-PRS based on a first trigger signaling from a network device. (figure 9, label 912, paragraph 0109 – The use of an on-demand trigger message send by the network entity to the UE requesting a position message of the UE. Figure 9, label 921, paragraph 0111 – The UE (label 700) sends a reference signal that contains SL-PRS in response to the trigger). Regarding claim 11, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 10, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the first terminal to: report request information to the network device, wherein the request information is used to request the network device to instruct the first terminal to send the first-type SL-PRS or the second-type SL-PRS. (Figure 9, labels 930, 932, paragraph 0124 – The PRS configuration request to the base station from the UE requests configuring the transfer between the UE and anchors used for sidelink as in the second-type SL-PRS (label 905)). Regarding claim 12, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 10, wherein the first trigger signaling is indicated explicitly; and (figure 9, label 912, paragraph 0109 – The use of an on-demand trigger message send by the network entity to the UE requesting a position message of the UE.) wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the first terminal to: receive first configuration information from the network device, wherein the first configuration information is used to configure at least one of a transmission resource or a transmission parameter of the SL-PRS. (Figure 9, label 954, paragraph 0126 – The network entity sends a PRS configuration to the UE which contains “one or more parameters of an RS configuration, e.g., a DCI MAC-CE from a TRP or LPP from an LMF.”) Regarding claim 13, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 9, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the first terminal to: send the first-type SL-PRS or the second-type SL-PRS based on a third trigger signaling from a sidelink (SL). (Figure 9, label 962, paragraph 0128 – The anchor sends a SL-PRS request to the UE based on the PRS configuration message with indicated parameters. This is a second-type SL-PRS as the PRS is passed through an anchor (label 964)). Regarding claim 14, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the third trigger signaling comprises: an SL-PRS from a second terminal. (Figure 9, label 962, paragraph 0128 – The anchor sends a PRS to the UE). Regarding claim 15, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the third trigger signaling comprises: indication information from a second terminal in a broadcast, multicast, or unicast mode. (paragraph 0089 – The use of broadcast, multicast, and unicast signals transmitted and received at the UE in response to a received signal request). Regarding claim 16, Bao teaches, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the first terminal to: send the first-type SL-PRS or the second-type SL-PRS in a case that a PSCCH/PSSCH message associated with the second-type SL-PRS and the PSCCH/PSSCH message comprises indication information. (Figure 9, labels 964, 966 – The UE sends the PRS to the base station using the sidelink connection which is the second-type SL-PRS). Regarding claim 17, Bao teaches, A network device, comprising: a processor; and (Figure 3, label 310, paragraph 0070) a transceiver connected to the processor; and (Figure 3, label 315, paragraph 0070) a memory storing one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the network device to: (Figure 3, label 311, paragraph 0070) send a first trigger signaling to a first terminal, wherein the first trigger signaling is used to trigger the first terminal to send a first-type sidelink PRS (SL-PRS) or a second-type SL-PRS. (figure 9, label 912, paragraph 0109 – The use of an on-demand trigger message send by the network entity to the UE requesting a position message of the UE. Figure 9, label 921, paragraph 0111 – The UE (label 700) sends a reference signal that contains SL-PRS in response to the trigger). Regarding claim 19, Bao teaches, The network device according to claim 17, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the network device to: receive request information reported by the first terminal, wherein the request information is used to request the network device to instruct the first terminal to send the first-type SL-PRS or the second-type SL-PRS. (Figure 9, labels 930, 932, paragraph 0124 – The PRS configuration request to the base station from the UE requests configuring the transfer between the UE and anchors used for sidelink as in the second-type SL-PRS (label 905)). Regarding claim 20, Bao teaches, The network device according to claim 17, wherein the first trigger signaling is explicitly indicated; and (figure 9, label 912, paragraph 0109 – The use of an on-demand trigger message send by the network entity to the UE requesting a position message of the UE.) wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the network device to: send first configuration information to the first terminal, wherein the first configuration information is used to configure at least one of a transmission resource or a transmission parameter of the SL-PRS. (Figure 9, label 954, paragraph 0126 – The network entity sends a PRS configuration to the UE which contains “one or more parameters of an RS configuration, e.g., a DCI MAC-CE from a TRP or LPP from an LMF.”) 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 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao in view of Damnjanovic et al. (US 20220278891 A1), hereinafter Damnjanovic. Regarding claim 18, Bao teaches, wherein sending the first trigger signaling to the first terminal comprises: sending the first trigger signaling to the first terminal in a case that the assistance information satisfies a trigger condition. (figure 9, label 912, paragraph 0109 – The use of an on-demand trigger message send by the network entity to the UE requesting a position message of the UE.) Bao fails to teach, The network device according to claim 17, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the network device to: receive assistance information reported by the first terminal, wherein the assistance information is used to assist the network device in deciding whether to send the first trigger signaling; However, Damnjanovic teaches, The network device according to claim 17, wherein the one or more instructions, which when executed by the processor, further causes the network device to: receive assistance information reported by the first terminal, wherein the assistance information is used to assist the network device in deciding whether to send the first trigger signaling; (Figure 4, labels 415, 420, 425, 430, 435, paragraph 01900195 – The UE and base station decide if trigger conditions for activations of the relay connection sidelink have been satisfied). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bao to incorporate the teachings of Damnjanovic. The purpose of doing so is to use a set of parameters to determine whether to activate the sidelink and begins transmission (paragraph 0061 of Damnjanovic). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form. US 20250138132 A1 – Figures 4-6, Paragraphs 0098-0125: first and second triggering information along with communication between UE and base station US 20220264338 A1 – Figure 12, paragraphs 0063, 0167 – Communication of sidelink data using triggering mechanism between an RX UE, TX UE and a base station. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ryan Crigler whose telephone number is (571)272-9376. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Nicholas A. Jensen can be reached at (571) 270-5443. 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. /RYAN CRIGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 2472 /NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 6m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 2 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month