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 (IDS) submitted on 11/27/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,192,948. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims are directed to positioning by transmitting positioning signals through multiple directional beams, collecting fingerprint measurements, training beam-specific learning models associated with reference positions, selecting one or more beams based on the learning model outputs to mitigate environmental changes, and determining position using the selected beams as illustrated in the table below. The differences between the claims merely recite additional implementation details that would have been obvious design choices to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Application #18961756 Patent #12,192,948
1. A positioning method, performed by a terminal located in a target space, comprising:
allowing one or more reference nodes to measure positioning signals by transmitting the positioning signals through a plurality of directional beams in a beam sweeping scheme; and
receiving information on a position of the terminal from a central node,
wherein the one or more reference nodes transmit measurement results obtained by measuring the positioning signals to the central node, and
the central node selects at least one beam least affected by an environmental change among the plurality of directional beams by inputting the measurement results to one or more learning models each of which is generated for each of the plurality of directional beams and/or each of a plurality of reference positions existing in the target space, and
determines an estimated position of the terminal based on at least one learning model for reference positions for the selected at least one beam and the measurement results.
1. A beam fingerprint-based positioning method, performed by a communication node located in a target space, the beam fingerprint-based positioning method comprising:
performing measurements on positioning signals transmitted from at least one reference node through a plurality of directional beams in a beam sweeping scheme;
transmitting a result of the measurements to a central node; and
receiving information on a position of the communication node from the central node,
wherein the central node selects at least one beam least affected by an environmental change among the plurality of directional beams by inputting the received result of the measurements to learning models each of which is generated for each of the plurality of directional beams at each of a plurality of reference positions existing in the target space, and
determines an estimated position of the communication node based on learning models for reference positions for the selected at least one beam and the received result of the measurements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowable over the prior art.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art does not teach or suggest wherein
“the central node selects at least one beam least affected by an environmental change among the plurality of directional beams by inputting the measurement results to one or more learning models each of which is generated for each of the plurality of directional beams and/or each of a plurality of reference positions existing in the target space, and
determines an estimated position of the terminal based on at least one learning model for reference positions for the selected at least one beam and the measurement results” as recited by independent claims 1, 9 and 16.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US PAT 9237543 discussing performing positioning using learned beam information
US PUBLICATION NO 20220321192 discussing use of machine learning with beam fingerprints
US PAT 11122397 discussing beam sweeping and fingerprint for environment state estimation
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIRAPON TULOP whose telephone number is (571)270-7491. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
/JIRAPON TULOP/Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights