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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/11/2024 and 08/13/2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on
12/11/2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment also filed on 12/11/2024. Claims 1-8 and 11-18 are now pending in the present application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the font in figures 5 and 6 is too small and barely legible.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office Action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended”. If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the Examiner, the Applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office Action. If a response to the present Office Action fails to include proper drawing corrections, corrected drawings or arguments therefor, the response can be held NON-RESPONSIVE and/or the application could be ABANDONED since the objections/corrections to the drawings are no longer held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim limitations of claim 2 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language:
“UE comprising means for sensing”; and
“UE comprising means for evaluating”.
Claim limitations of claim 12 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language:
“UE comprising means for sensing”; and
“UE comprising means for evaluating”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, claim limitations “UE comprising means for sensing” and “UE comprising means for evaluating” (in claims 2 and 12) invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
The specification is devoid of adequate structure to perform the claimed function(s). There is no disclosure of any particular structure for performing “UE comprising means for sensing” and “UE comprising means for evaluating”. The specification does not provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand structures to perform the claimed function(s).
Therefore, the claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As describe above, the disclosure does not provide adequate structure to perform the claimed functions (i.e. “UE comprising means for sensing” and “UE comprising means for evaluating”). The specification does not demonstrate that Applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed function(s) because the invention is not described with sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention(s).
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)(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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 8, 11-14, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ABIR ET AL. (WO 2023062547 A1) hereinafter ABIR.
Regarding claim 1, ABIR discloses a first User Equipment, UE, comprising:
at least one processor (FIG. 12: Processor 1205) and
at least one memory (FIG. 12: Memory 1210) storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first UE at least to:
receive, from a network node, information indicative of: a request to determine information indicative of a position of a second UE based at least in part on a set of one or more characteristics of the second UE. wherein each characteristic of the set is a non-unique characteristic that more than one UE can have. and the set of one or more characteristics of the second UE, ([00119] “In an LMF Centric Approach, according to the embodiment above and considering UE2 and UE3 are in an LMF -centric coverage scenario, where UE2 is under network coverage of an LMF while UE3 is out of coverage, the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning (equivalent to “characteristics”) information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”));
determine a set of one or more characteristics of a UE. wherein the determination is performed based at least in part on the received information, ([00104] “For reference UEs, in one embodiment, UE1 902, UE4 908, and UE5 910 have acquired their absolute positions (e.g., latitude and longitude) (equivalent to “characteristics”) using RAT-dependent positioning methods and are nominated by gNB as reference UEs or have nominated themselves as Ref UEs (anchor UEs for sidelink), via explicit or implicit configuration. The nomination procedure could contain additional information whether the UE nominates as reference UE for Uu positioning, SL positioning, both Uu and SL positioning. It also depends on the support of the sidelink communication by the reference UE”);
perform a comparison of: the determined set of one or more characteristics of the UE. with the received set of one or more characteristics of the second UE, ([0097], [0094] “the solution enables the determination of relative position of blind (blocked) UEs using information from reference UE(s) (e.g., anchor UE(s)) using sidelink. Besides, the method can use information from more than one reference UEs (e.g., anchor UEs) to enhance the relative positioning accuracy. In some examples, the absolute position of the UEs may be determined based on the absolute position of the reference UE(s) and the relative positioning measurements”, (in the context of the claim limitation at hand, “relative positioning accuracy/ measurements” maybe perceived as “characteristics”));
determine a position of the UE. wherein the determination of the position is performed based at least in part on the comparison, ([0097], [0094] “the solution enables the determination of relative position of blind (blocked) UEs using information from reference UE(s) (e.g., anchor UE(s)) using sidelink. Besides, the method can use information from more than one reference UEs (e.g., anchor UEs) to enhance the relative positioning accuracy. In some examples, the absolute position of the UEs may be determined based on the absolute position of the reference UE(s) and the relative positioning measurements”);
and send, to the network node, information indicative of the position of the second UE. wherein the position of the second UE is defined as the position of the UE; ([00119] “the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”). […] It then starts a cooperative positioning session by transmitting a unicast or groupcast CP request to its reference UEs. Reference UEs cooperate as described in embodiment 1 and 2 to determine the relative/absolute position of UE3 and relay it to LMF” [00117] Upon receiving information from reference UEs, UE2 transmits assistance data to location measurement unit (“LMU”) or location management component (“LMC”) entity at gNB if the gNB has LMF functionality (e.g., LMU or LMC capabilities) or is co-located with an LMF and requests the distance determination”).
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein the first UE is at least one of the following: a Position Reference Unit, PRU; a UE comprising means for sensing one or more characteristics of other UE; or a UE comprising means for evaluating a position of other UE, ([0092] “This present disclosure solves the less accurate relative positioning/ranging due to NLOS/multipath with solution for enabling SL cooperative positioning based on information provided from reference UEs to target UEs, whose positioning is to be determined. [0094] the solution enables the determination of relative position of blind (blocked) UEs using information from reference UE(s) (e.g., anchor UE(s)) using sidelink”).
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein the network node is at least one of the following: a positioning server; a Location Management Function, LMF; or a UE, ([00119] “In an LMF Centric Approach, according to the embodiment above and considering UE2 and UE3 are in an LMF -centric coverage scenario, where UE2 is under network coverage of an LMF while UE3 is out of coverage, the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3”).
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein determining the position of the UE is performed based on whether the determined set of one or more characteristics of the UE differs from the received set of one or more characteristics of the second UE by less than a threshold amount, ([00136] “the processor 1205 is configured to transmit a cooperative positioning request message to at least one reference device comprising a ranging or relative positioning request between the apparatus and a target device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to receive at least one positioning quantity from the at least one reference device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to determine ranging or relative position between the at least one reference device and the target device based on the received at least one positioning quantity.
[00137] […] the processor 1205 is configured to transmit the cooperative positioning request message in response to determining a positioning quality metric between the apparatus and the target device is below a threshold”).
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein determining the position of the UE comprises at least one of the following: determining the position of the UE using one or more sensors of the first UE; determining an absolute position of the UE; determining a position of the UE relative to the first UE; determining a position of the first UE; determining a distance and/or a direction of the UE from the first UE; determining the position of the UE relative to a reference location; determining a distance and/or a direction of the UE from a reference location; and determining an indication of a level of accuracy of the position of the UE, ([00119] “[…] the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”). […] Reference UEs cooperate as described in embodiment 1 and 2 to determine the relative/absolute position of UE3 and relay it to LMF”).
Regarding claim 7, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein the received request comprises an indication of a reference position, and wherein the position of the UE is determined relative to the reference position, ([00136] “the processor 1205 is configured to transmit a cooperative positioning request message to at least one reference device comprising a ranging or relative positioning request between the apparatus and a target device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to receive at least one positioning quantity from the at least one reference device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to determine ranging or relative position between the at least one reference device and the target device based on the received at least one positioning quantity. [00137] […] the processor 1205 is configured to transmit the cooperative positioning request message in response to determining a positioning quality metric between the apparatus and the target device is below a threshold”).
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR discloses wherein the one or more characteristics characterize at least one of the following: a mobility status, a coarse location, a location relative to a reference location, an orientation relative to a reference orientation, a type of UE, a transmission beam, a transmission carrier frequency, a transmission Bandwidth Part, BWP, a transmission radio resource, a transmission data traffic, an antenna, or a transmission radio channel, ([00193], [0072] “Separate positioning techniques as indicated in Table 2 can be currently configured and performed based on the requirements of the LMF and UE capabilities. The transmission of PRS enable the UE to perform UE positioning-related measurements to enable the computation of a UE’s location estimate and are configured per Transmission Reception Point (“TRP”), where a TRP may transmit one or more beams. [0092] a reference UE with known location or location that can be determined, e.g., in coverage UE with location determined by RAT- dependent positioning techniques”).
Regarding claim 11, ABIR discloses a first User Equipment, UE, comprising:
at least one processor (FIG. 12: Processor 1205) and
at least one memory (FIG. 12: Memory 1210) storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor. cause the first UE at least to:
receive, from a network node, information indicative of a request for information indicative of: a position of a UE. and a set of one or more characteristics of the UE. wherein each characteristic of the set is a non-unique characteristic that more than one UE can have, ([00119] “In an LMF Centric Approach, according to the embodiment above and considering UE2 and UE3 are in an LMF -centric coverage scenario, where UE2 is under network coverage of an LMF while UE3 is out of coverage, the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning (equivalent to “characteristics”) information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”)”);
determine, based at least in part on the received information: the position of the UE. and the set of one or more characteristics of the UE, ([00104] “For reference UEs, in one embodiment, UE1 902, UE4 908, and UE5 910 have acquired their absolute positions (e.g., latitude and longitude) (equivalent to “characteristics”) using RAT-dependent positioning methods and are nominated by gNB as reference UEs or have nominated themselves as Ref UEs (anchor UEs for sidelink), via explicit or implicit configuration. The nomination procedure could contain additional information whether the UE nominates as reference UE for Uu positioning, SL positioning, both Uu and SL positioning. It also depends on the support of the sidelink communication by the reference UE”);
and send, to the network node, information indicative of: the determined position of the UE: and the determined set of one or more characteristics of the UE, ([00119] “the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”). […] It then starts a cooperative positioning session by transmitting a unicast or groupcast CP request to its reference UEs. Reference UEs cooperate as described in embodiment 1 and 2 to determine the relative/absolute position of UE3 and relay it to LMF, [00117] Upon receiving information from reference UEs, UE2 transmits assistance data to location measurement unit (“LMU”) or location management component (“LMC”) entity at gNB if the gNB has LMF functionality (e.g., LMU or LMC capabilities) or is co-located with an LMF and requests the distance determination”).
Regarding claim 12, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR discloses wherein the first UE is at least one of the following: a Position Reference Unit, PRU; a UE comprising means for sensing one or more characteristics of other UE; or a UE comprising means for evaluating a position of other UE, ([0092] “This present disclosure solves the less accurate relative positioning/ranging due to NLOS/multipath with solution for enabling SL cooperative positioning based on information provided from reference UEs to target UEs, whose positioning is to be determined. [0094] the solution enables the determination of relative position of blind (blocked) UEs using information from reference UE(s) (e.g., anchor UE(s)) using sidelink”).
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR discloses wherein the network node is at least one of the following: a positioning server, a Location Management Function, LMF; a UE, ([00119] “In an LMF Centric Approach, according to the embodiment above and considering UE2 and UE3 are in an LMF -centric coverage scenario, where UE2 is under network coverage of an LMF while UE3 is out of coverage, the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3”).
Regarding claim 14, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR discloses wherein determining the position of the UE comprises at least one of the following: determining the position of the UE using one or more sensors of the first UE; determining an absolute position of the UE; determining a position of the UE relative to the first UE; determining a position of the first UE; determining a distance and/or a direction of the UE from the first UE; determining the position of the UE relative to a reference location; determining a distance and/or a direction of the UE from a reference location; and determining an indication of a level of accuracy of the position of the UE, ([00119] “[…] the LMF may request UE2 to perform measurements in order to determine the absolute/relative positioning information with respect to UE3 (including distance d.sub. U2 U3) via LTE positioning protocol (“LPP”). […] Reference UEs cooperate as described in embodiment 1 and 2 to determine the relative/absolute position of UE3 and relay it to LMF”).
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR discloses wherein the received request comprises an indication of a reference position, and wherein the position of the UE is determined relative to the reference position, ([00136] “the processor 1205 is configured to transmit a cooperative positioning request message to at least one reference device comprising a ranging or relative positioning request between the apparatus and a target device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to receive at least one positioning quantity from the at least one reference device. […] the processor 1205 is configured to determine ranging or relative position between the at least one reference device and the target device based on the received at least one positioning quantity. [00137] […] the processor 1205 is configured to transmit the cooperative positioning request message in response to determining a positioning quality metric between the apparatus and the target device is below a threshold”).
Regarding claim 17, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR discloses wherein the one or more characteristics characterize at least one of the following: a mobility status, a coarse location, a location relative to a reference location, an orientation relative to a reference orientation, a type of UE, a transmission beam, a transmission carrier frequency, a transmission Bandwidth Part, BWP, a transmission radio resource, a transmission data traffic, an antenna, or a transmission radio channel, ([00193], [0072] “Separate positioning techniques as indicated in Table 2 can be currently configured and performed based on the requirements of the LMF and UE capabilities. The transmission of PRS enable the UE to perform UE positioning-related measurements to enable the computation of a UE’s location estimate and are configured per Transmission Reception Point (“TRP”), where a TRP may transmit one or more beams. [0092] a reference UE with known location or location that can be determined, e.g., in coverage UE with location determined by RAT- dependent positioning techniques”).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ZHANG ET AL. (US 20200128506 A1) hereinafter ZHANG.
Regarding claim 18, ZHANG discloses a second User Equipment, UE, comprising:
at least one processor (FIG. 10: Processing circuit 1004) and
at least one memory (FIG. 10: Memory 1002, 1003) storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor. cause the second UE at least to: send, to a network node, information indicative of a request for information indicative of: a position of a UE. and a set of one or more characteristics of the UE, wherein each characteristic of the set is a non-unique characteristic that more than one UE can have, ([0119] (FIG.3: Actions 301, 302 [0120] “Wireless devices, here the first wireless device 120 and the second wireless device 121, may send status information to the wireless communication network 100 that receives the status information. The status information may for each device comprise one or more indications on the following (equivalent to “characteristics”): [0121] a position associated with the device, [0122] an identifier, e.g. beam id, of a radio beam serving the device, [0123] a time duration for remaining in the group, i.e. that the device will or may be able to remain in the group, [0124] one or more operative positioning capabilities of the device, and [0125] a positioning capability and/or positioning accuracy provided by the device, e.g. a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) subscription level”);
receive, from the network node responsive to sending the information, information indicative of: the set of one or more characteristics of the UE. and the position of the UE: and determine a position of the second UE based, at least in part on: the received set of one or more characteristics of the UE. the received position of the UE. and a set of one or more characteristics of the UE, ([0143] Action 305, [0144] “The wireless communication network 100 may send, in response to the determination in Action 303, group assignment information to also the one or more other wireless communication devices of the group, e.g. the second wireless device 121, which information informs these devise that the first wireless device 120 is their positioning representative and/or that they are members of said group, [0147] The present action may thus exemplify, and may fully or partly correspond to, Action 201 above for the second wireless device 122 “(see FIG. 2: step 201)).
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.
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.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ABIR ET AL. (WO 2023062547 A1) hereinafter ABIR, in view of Tenny et al. (US 20080318596 A1), hereinafter Tenny.
Regarding claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, ABIR does not disclose wherein the received request comprises an indication of a geographic region, and wherein the first UE determines the set of one or more characteristics for one or more UE that are in the geographic region.
In the same field of endeavor, Tenny discloses wherein the received request comprises an indication of a geographic region, and wherein the first UE determines the set of one or more characteristics for one or more UE that are in the geographic region, ([0046] “any UE that is within radio coverage of home base station 120 may be used to determine the position of home base station 120. The UEs used to determine the position of home base station 120 do not need to actually access the home base station. These UEs may be identified by home base station 120 (e.g., based on signals received from the UEs (equivalent to “characteristics”) or […] [0048] The position of home base station 120 may also be determined based on RTT measurements for one or more UEs and known positions of the UEs using trilateration. [0038] Home base station 120 may send a position request to base station 130 to request the position of UE 110a (step a). Base station 130 may then send a message to UE 110a to trigger a positioning procedure (step b) and may exchange messages with UE 110a for the positioning procedure (step c). Base station 130 may obtain (equivalent to “determine”) a position estimate for UE 110a from the positioning procedure and may send a position report containing this position estimate to home base station 120 (step d). […] In general, home base station 120 may send any number of position requests for any number of UEs and may obtain position estimates for these UEs from base station 130. Home base station 120 may then estimate (equivalent to “determine”) its position based on the position estimates for all UEs, […]”, (in the context of the claim limitation at hand, the UEs RTT measurements and received signals, maybe perceived as “characteristics”)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the UE2, disclosed by ABIR ([00119]) to include the UEs, disclosed by Tenny. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to determine the position of home base station 120, Tenny ([0046] [0048] [0038]).
Regarding claim 15, as applied to claim 11 above, ABIR does not disclose wherein the received request comprises an indication of a geographic region, and wherein the first UE determines the set of one or more characteristics for one or more UE that are in the geographic region.
In the same field of endeavor, Tenny discloses wherein the received request comprises an indication of a geographic region, and wherein the first UE determines the set of one or more characteristics for one or more UE that are in the geographic region, ([0046] “any UE that is within radio coverage of home base station 120 may be used to determine the position of home base station 120. The UEs used to determine the position of home base station 120 do not need to actually access the home base station. These UEs may be identified by home base station 120 (e.g., based on signals received from the UEs (equivalent to “characteristics”) or […] [0048] The position of home base station 120 may also be determined based on RTT measurements for one or more UEs and known positions of the UEs using trilateration. [0038] Home base station 120 may send a position request to base station 130 to request the position of UE 110a (step a). Base station 130 may then send a message to UE 110a to trigger a positioning procedure (step b) and may exchange messages with UE 110a for the positioning procedure (step c). Base station 130 may obtain (equivalent to “determine”) a position estimate for UE 110a from the positioning procedure and may send a position report containing this position estimate to home base station 120 (step d). […] In general, home base station 120 may send any number of position requests for any number of UEs and may obtain position estimates for these UEs from base station 130. Home base station 120 may then estimate (equivalent to “determine”) its position based on the position estimates for all UEs, […]”, (in the context of the claim limitation at hand, the UEs RTT measurements and received signals, maybe perceived as “characteristics”)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the UE2, disclosed by ABIR ([00119]) to include the UEs, disclosed by Tenny. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to determine the position of home base station 120, Tenny ([0046] [0048] [0038]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to GILBERT GRANT whose telephone number is (703)756-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 7:00 pm, Monday - Thursday.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 571-272-7915. 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.
/GILBERT M. GRANT/Examiner, Art Unit 2642
/ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights