DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner Notes
2. The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the Applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure (see MPEP §2163.06). Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) of the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
4. Claim(s) 1-15
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
5. The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a 2 step inquiry.
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), see MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: see MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2) and 2106.05(a) thru (d) for explanations.
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? see MPEP 2106.05
101 Analysis – Step 1
6. Claim(s) 1-9 is/are directed to an apparatus.
Therefore, claim(s) 1-9 is/are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
7. Claim(s) 10-20 is/are directed to one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (i.e. an article of manufacture).
Therefore, claim(s) 10-20 is/are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Representative Claim
8. Claim 1 will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. The recited abstract ideas are emphasized below [with the category of abstract idea in brackets] and they are analyzed in 101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I section. The additional limitations beyond the abstract ideas are underlined below [with a description of the additional limitations in brackets]) and they are analyzed in 101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II section. Claim 1 recites:
An apparatus of a user equipment (UE), the apparatus comprising:
a memory to store flight path information for a flight path of the UE [applying the abstract idea using generic computing module, Apply it 2106.05(f)]; and
processor circuitry coupled to the memory, the processor circuitry to [applying the abstract idea using generic computing module, Apply it 2106.05(f)]:
send the flight path information to a network entity of a wireless cellular network [pre-solution activity (data gathering), 2106.05(g)];
identify a change in the flight path information [mental process/step]; and
report the change in the flight path information to the network entity [insignificant post-solution activity (outputting results of the mental process) 2106.05(g)].
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
9. Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes. see MPEP 2106(A)(II)(1) and MPEP 2106.04(a)-(c).
10. Independent claim(s) 1, and 10 include(s) limitations that recite an abstract idea. As mentioned above, claim 1 will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection.
11. The Examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers steps that could be carried out in the human mind. For example, “identify a change in the flight path information” step(s) encompass(es) a user making observation, evaluation or judgement about the planned path of a drone a the actual path of a drone could all be carried out in one’s mind. The same user looking at the data collected, could form a simple judgement and conclude whether the flight path has deviated from the planned flight path by comparing the flight path with the planned flight path which is identifying a change in the flight path information. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
12. Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2) and MPEP 2106.04(d)(2). It must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
13. For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
14. Regarding the additional limitations of “a memory to store flight path information for a flight path of the UE” and “processor circuitry coupled to the memory” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer (e.g.: controller) to perform the process.
15. Regarding the additional limitation(s) of “send the flight path information to a network entity of a wireless cellular network” and “report the change in the flight path information to the network entity” the examiner submits that this/these limitation(s) is/are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer to perform the process. In particular, the “send the flight path information to a network entity of a wireless cellular network” step(s) is/are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering data for use in the evaluating step), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The “report the change in the flight path information to the network entity” step(s) is/are also recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of providing the evaluation result from the evaluating step), and amounts to mere post solution activity, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
16. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. see MPEP § 2106.05. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
17. Regarding Step 2B of the Revised Guidance, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of “a memory to store flight path information for a flight path of the UE” and “processor circuitry coupled to the memory” amounts to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. As discussed above, in regard to the additional limitations of “send the flight path information to a network entity of a wireless cellular network” and “report the change in the flight path information to the network entity” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities. Hence, the claim is not patent eligible.
18. As established above claim 1 is representative of both independent claims and therefore claim(s) 10 is/are rejected for the same reason.
19. Dependent claim(s) 2-9, and 11-15 does/do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, dependent claims 2-9, and 11-15 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of 1.
20. Therefore, claim(s) 1-15 is/are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
21. 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.
(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.
22. Claim(s) 1-5
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saha et al. (US-20220404484-A1).
In regard to claim 1
, Saha discloses an apparatus of a user equipment (UE), the apparatus comprising (See at least Fig. 5, and [0101]: UE 500 is a UAV (Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle) [i.e., an apparatus of a user equipment (UE)]):
a memory to store flight path information for a flight path of the UE (See at least Fig. 5, and [0098-0101]: the processor 510 in conjunction with the memory 530 [i.e., a memory] includes a flight path reporting unit 550. The flight path reporting unit 550 is configured to provide flight path information. Examiner notes, to provide the flight path, the memory must necessarily store the flight path); and
processor circuitry coupled to the memory, the processor circuitry to (See at least Fig. 5, and [0098]: the processor 510 [i.e., processor circuitry ] in conjunction with the memory 530 [i.e., coupled to the memory] includes a flight path reporting unit 550.):
send the flight path information to a network entity of a wireless cellular network (See at least Fig. 8, and [0114]: the target UE 801, e.g., the flight path reporting unit 550, transmits flight path information 832 [i.e., send the flight path information] to the network entity 802 [i.e., a network entity of a wireless cellular network]);
identify a change in the flight path information (See at least [0022-0023]: a server is informed of a flight path from a UE and the server uses the flight path information to improve positioning accuracy for the UE and/or reduce latency of positioning for the UE. Communication traffic to provide flight path information is regulated by avoiding reporting updated flight path information unless a significant change in the flight path occurs, by reporting updated flight path information no more often than a threshold time, and/or by reporting changes to a flight path instead of the entire flight path. Examiner notes, as noted above, the change in the flight path is reported. Reporting the change in the flight path necessarily encompasses identifying a change in the flight path information); and
report the change in the flight path information to the network entity (See at least [0022-0023]: the UE provides flight path information to one or more network entities [i.e., the network entity] such as a server and/or a base station. A server is informed of a flight path from a UE and the server uses the flight path information to improve positioning accuracy for the UE and/or reduce latency of positioning for the UE. Communication traffic to provide flight path information is regulated by avoiding reporting updated flight path information unless a significant change in the flight path occurs, by reporting updated flight path information [i.e., report the change in the flight path information] no more often than a threshold time, and/or by reporting changes to a flight path instead of the entire flight path).
In regard to claim 2
, Saha discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the flight path information includes a location and a timestamp for respective waypoints (See at least Figs. 8-9, and [0120]: the flight path information 832, 922 include a full or partial flight path comprising one or more waypoints, with each waypoint including a waypoint ID, a location [i.e., a location … for respective waypoints], and a timestamp [i.e., a timestamp for respective waypoints]).
In regard to claim 3
, Saha discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein to identify the change in the flight path information is to identify a change in either the location or the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints (See at least [0022-0023]: the flight path information includes waypoints. The UE provides provide the flight path information in response to occurrence of a trigger event. The UE provides differential flight path information as one or more waypoints each with a respective identifier and the network entity adds a waypoint to the previous flight path if the previous flight path lacked the corresponding identifier, and modifies waypoint information of the previous flight path if a waypoint with the corresponding identifier exists in the previous flight path. The UE provides as differential information a waypoint identifier and a removal indication and the network entity removes a waypoint, that has that identifier, from the previous flight path. Communication traffic to provide flight path information is regulated by avoiding reporting updated flight path information unless a significant change in the flight path occurs, by reporting updated flight path information no more often than a threshold time [i.e., to identify a change in either the location or the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints], and/or by reporting changes to a flight path instead of the entire flight path. Examiner notes, adding or removing a waypoint encompasses identifying a change in the location of one or more of the waypoints).
In regard to claim 4
, Saha discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the change is reported if the change is in the location of one or more of the waypoints but not if the change is in the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints (See at least Fig. 8, and [0105]: as an example of configuring the target UE 801 for partial flight path reporting, the network entity 802, such as the flight path request unit 650, produces the request 822 to provide one or more spatial offsets and a temporal offset. Using Cartesian coordinates, the request 822 indicates x, y, and z coordinates of a reference location, indicates an x-offset Δx, a y-offset Δy, and/or a z-offset Δz, indicates a reference time t, and indicates a time offset Δt. The offsets indicates to the target UE 801 to exclude any waypoint in the flight path 710 whose location is outside of a volume, around the reference location, defined by x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz, or a timestamp beyond t+/−Δt. Examiner notes, as mentioned above, for partial flight path reporting, the waypoints are excluded based on the defined range of x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz, or a timestamp beyond t+/−Δt. When the location is within x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz range, the location is excluded and the change is not reported. However, when the location is outside the defined range above, then the location is not excluded and the change is reported. That is, the change is reported if the change is in the location of one or more of the waypoints but not if the change is in the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints).
In regard to claim 5
, Saha discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the change is reported if the change is greater than a threshold (See at least [0022 & 0111]: the UE provides the flight path information in response to occurrence of a trigger event. A trigger event is defined as the spatial difference exceeding a spatial threshold [i.e., wherein the change is reported if the change is greater than a threshold] or the temporal difference exceeding a time threshold).
23. Claim(s) 10-13
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Phuyal et al. (US-20220386208-A1).
In regard to claim 10
, Phuyal discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (CRM) having instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors configure a user equipment (UE) to (See at least [0091]: the memory 704 includes a non-transitory computer-readable medium [i.e., one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (CRM)]. The memory 704 stores instructions 706 [i.e., having instructions, stored thereon]. The instructions 706 includes instructions that, when executed by the processor 702 [i.e., when executed by one or more processors], cause the processor 702 to perform the operations described herein with reference to the UEs 115 [i.e., configure a user equipment (UE)] in connection with aspects of the present disclosure):
encode a report of flight path information for transmission to a next generation Node B (gNB) (See at least Fig. 7, and [0035 & 0095]: a Base station (BS) 105 is a station that communicates with UEs 115 and it is referred to as an evolved node B (eNB), a next generation eNB (gNB), an access point, and the like. The transceiver 710 includes the modem subsystem 712 and the RF unit 714. The transceiver 710 is configured to communicate bi-directionally with other devices, such as the BSs 105 [i.e., a next generation Node B (gNB)]. The modem subsystem 712 is configured to modulate and encode the data from the flight path update module 709 [i.e., encode a report of flight path information] according to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the modem subsystem, which is responsible for sending and receiving messages, encodes the data, including the flight path update data. That is, encoding a report of flight path information for transmission to a next generation Node B (gNB));
identify a change in the flight path information (See at least Fig. 4, and [0072]: an event may occur at a waypoint and/or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change. At 420, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. Examiner notes, transmitting a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path is available, necessarily encompasses identifying a change in the flight path information); and
encode, based on the identified change, UE assistance information for transmission to the gNB, wherein the UE assistance information includes a flag to indicate that updated flight path information is available (See at least Fig. 7, and [0072 & 0095]: when an event occurs at a waypoint or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag [i.e., a flag to indicate that updated flight path information is available], in a message [i.e., UE assistance information] to the target BS. The transceiver 710 is configured to communicate bi-directionally with other devices, such as the BSs 105 [i.e., the gNB]. The modem subsystem 712 is configured to modulate and/or encode the data from the flight path update module 709 [i.e., encode, based on the identified change, UE assistance information for transmission] according to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). Examiner notes, Applicant’s specification has not provided a concise definition for the UE Assistance information. Applicant’s specification on page 19, lines 24-25 states: “the UE may send UE assistance information to the network to indicate that updated flight path information is available.” Since messages are exchanged between the UE and the network entities (Base Stations), the UE assistance information was interpreted as a message that is sent by the UE to the network entities. As mentioned above, the modem subsystem, which is responsible for sending and receiving messages, encodes the data included in the messages, including the flight path update data. Accordingly, Phuyal teaches encoding UE assistance information).
In regard to claim 11
, Phuyal discloses the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 10, wherein the flight path information includes a location and a timestamp for respective waypoints (See at least Fig.1 and [0054 & 0085]: the flight path information is dynamic and periodically updated. A complete flight path including all waypoints (with or without expected time of arrivals (ETAs), also commonly referred to as timestamps [i.e., wherein the flight path information includes a timestamp for respective waypoints]) associated with the UE 115 is communicated to the target BS 105b. The flight path information includes a sequence of waypoints and ETAs. The waypoints include locations (e.g., GPS locations) corresponding to a latitude, a longitude, and an altitude [i.e., wherein the flight path information includes a location for respective waypoints]).
In regard to claim 12
, Phuyal discloses the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 11, wherein the flag is included in the UE assistance information if the identified change is a change in either the location or the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints (See at least Fig. 4, and [0072]: a the flight path information may be modified. An event may occur at a waypoint and/or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change [i.e., the identified change is a change in either the location]. At 420, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, in a message to the target BS [i.e., wherein the flag is included in the UE assistance information]. Examiner notes, a change in the flight path necessarily causes a change in the location of one or more of the waypoints).
In regard to claim 13
, Phuyal discloses the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 11, wherein the flag is included in the UE assistance information if the change is in the location of one or more of the waypoints but not if the change is in the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints (See at least Fig. 4, and [0072]: a the flight path information may be modified. An event may occur at a waypoint and/or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change [i.e., the identified change is a change in either the location]. At 420, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, in a message to the target BS [i.e., wherein the flag is included in the UE assistance information]. Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the flag is included in the message to the BS based on a change in the flight path information. A change in the flight path necessarily causes a change in the location of one or more of the waypoints. That is, the flag is included in the UE assistance information if the change is in the location of one or more of the waypoints but not if the change is in the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
24. 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.
25. Claim(s) 6-9, and 16-18
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saha et al. (US-20220404484-A1) in view of Phuyal et al. (US-20220386208-A1).
In regard to claim 6
, Saha discloses the apparatus of claim 1, accordingly the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Saha is silent on wherein to report the change includes to send a flag to the network to indicate that updated flight path information is available.
However, Phuyal teaches when an event occurs at a waypoint or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change, the UE transmits a message to the target BS [i.e., to the network] indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, in a message to the target BS [i.e., wherein to report the change includes to send a flag to the network to indicate that updated flight path information is available] (See at least [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the invention of Saha, by incorporating the teachings of Phuyal, with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – communication systems, such that the UE includes and transmits a flag indicating availability of the updated flight path information in the report.
The motivation to modify is that, as acknowledged by Phuyal, improvements to mobility support for UAVs (See at least [0006]) which one of ordinary skill would have recognized allows the flight path to be accurate and safe.
In regard to claim 7
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the processor circuitry is further to:
receive, from the network entity, a request for the updated flight path information based on the flag (See at least Fig. 8, and [0103]: at stage 820, the network entity 802 [i.e., the network entity] transmits a flight path information request 822 [i.e., a request for the updated flight path information]. The flight path information request 822 configures the target UE 801 in one or more of a variety of ways to report flight path information. Examiner notes, configuring the target UE 801 to report flight path information necessarily requires receiving the request for the updated flight path information by the UE 801); and
send the updated flight path information to the network entity based on the request (See at least Fig. 8, and [0115]: at stage 840, if requested by the flight path information request 822, the target UE 801 transmits further flight path information 842 [i.e., send the updated flight path]).
Further, Phuyal teaches in response to receiving the newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, at 422 the target Base Stations (BS) transmits a message requesting the new flight path information. The flight path information request is requested in a flightPathInfoRequest message (See at least Fig. 4, and [0072]). Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the network entity (Base Statin) transmits a message to the UE based on the flag to request the new flight path. The UE receives the message. That is, receiving, from the network entity, a request for the updated flight path information based on the flag.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the invention of Saha, as modified by Phuyal, by further incorporating the teachings of Phuyal, with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – communication systems, such that when the network entity receives the newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, the network entity transmits a message to the UE requesting the new flight path information.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Phuyal in regard to claim 6.
In regard to claim 8
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the flag is included in UE assistance information.
Further, Phuyal teaches the UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable, in a message [i.e., wherein the flag is included in UE assistance information] to the target BS (See at least [0072]). Examiner notes, Applicant’s specification has not provided a concise definition for the UE Assistance information. Applicant’s specification on page 19, lines 24-25 states: “the UE may send UE assistance information to the network to indicate that updated flight path information is available.” Since messages are exchanged between the UE and the network entities (Base Stations), the UE assistance information was interpreted as a message that is sent by the UE to the network entities.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the invention of Saha, as modified by Phuyal, by further incorporating the teachings of Phuyal, with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – communication systems, such that the flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable, is transmitted to the network entity in a message.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Phuyal in regard to claim 6.
In regard to claim 9
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the apparatus is included in an uncrewed aerial vehicle (UAV) (See at least Fig. 7, and [101]: UE 700, which is an example of the UE 500, is a UAV (Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle) [i.e., an uncrewed aerial vehicle (UAV)]).
In regard to claim 16
, Saha teaches discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (CRM) having instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors configure a next generation Node B (gNB) to (See at least Fig. 6, and [0025 & 0052]: a non-transitory computer-readable medium [i.e., one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (CRM)] having stored thereon a corresponding set of computer instructions [i.e., having instructions, stored thereon] that upon execution would cause an associated processor to perform the functionality described herein. The BSs 110a, 110b, 114 comprise one or more TRPs. Each sector within a cell of a BS comprise a TRP, although multiple TRPs sharing a processor [i.e., one or more processors] but have separate antennas. Positioning functionality is implemented, at least in part, using the directional SS beams, sent by base stations (such as the gNBs 110a, 110b, and/or the ng-eNB 114) that are within range of the UE whose position is to be determined):
receive, from a user equipment (UE), first flight path information for a flight path of the UE (See at least Fig. 11, and [0129-0130]: at stage 1110, the method 1100 includes determining, at a user equipment (UE) [i.e., a user equipment (UE)], a flight path report to provide: partial-path flight path reporting, wherein the flight path report contains first flight path information [i.e., first flight path information for a flight path of the UE] indicative of a portion of the flight path of the UE that is less than all of the flight path of the UE. At stage 1120, the method 1100 includes transmitting, from the UE to a network entity, the flight path report. Examiner notes, the network entity receives the report sent by the UE. That is, receiving, from a user equipment (UE), first flight path information for a flight path of the UE);
receive, from the UE, the second flight path information, wherein the second flight path information is different than the first flight path information (Fig. 11, and [0111 & 0129-0130]: a trigger event is defined as the spatial difference exceeding a spatial threshold. The method comprises determining, at the UE, second flight path information for the flight path report in response to occurrence of a trigger event. At stage 1120, the method 1100 includes transmitting, from the UE to a network entity, the flight path report [i.e., the second flight path information]. Examiner notes, the UE transmits the second flight path and the network entity receives the second flight path. Furthermore, as mentioned above, the second flight path is based on a trigger event. That is, the second flight path information is different than the first flight path information based, especially when the trigger event is based on spatial difference exceeding a spatial threshold. Accordingly, Saha teaches receiving, from the UE, the second flight path information, wherein the second flight path information is different than the first flight path information);
While Saha discloses the method 1100 further comprises determining, at the UE, second flight path information [i.e., second flight path information] for the flight path report in response to occurrence of a trigger event, the second flight path information indicative of at least some of the flight path of the UE (See at least Fig. 11, and [0129]), Saha does not explicitly disclose receive, from the UE, UE assistance information that includes an indication that second flight path information is available;
encode, for transmission to the UE based on the indication, a request for the second flight path information;
However, Phuyal teaches when an event occurs at a waypoint or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag [i.e., an indication that second flight path information is available], in a message [i.e., UE assistance information] to the target BS. The transceiver 710 is configured to communicate bi-directionally with other devices, such as the BSs 105 [i.e., the gNB, ]. The transceiver 810 includes the modem subsystem 812 and the RF unit 814. The transceiver 810 is configured to communicate bi-directionally with other devices, such as the UEs 115 and/or 700 and/or another core network unit. The modem subsystem 812 is configured to modulate and/or encode data [i.e., encode, for transmission to the UE based on the indication] according to a MCS, e.g., a LDPC coding scheme, a turbo coding scheme, a convolutional coding scheme, a digital beamforming scheme, etc. In response to receiving the flightPathInfoAvailable message, the target BS requests the updated flight path information [i.e., a request for the second flight path information] (See at least Fig. 7-8, and [0072 & 0095 & 0106 & 0112]). Examiner notes, when the UE sends a message, the Base Station (gNB) receives the message. The message includes a flag that indicated a second flight path is available, as explained above. Accordingly, Phuyal teaches receiving, from the UE, UE assistance information that includes an indication that second flight path information is available. Furthermore, the modem subsystem 812 encodes the data. That means the request for the updated flight path (the second flight path) is encoded. As such, Phuyal teaches encoding, for transmission to the UE based on the indication, a request for the second flight path information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the invention of Saha, by incorporating the teachings of Phuyal, with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – communication systems, such that the UE transmits a message indicating that a second flight path information is available and the Base Station receives the message and sends an encoded request to the UE for receiving the second flight path information.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Phuyal in regard to claim 6.
In regard to claim 17
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 16, wherein the first and second flight path information each include respective locations and timestamps for a plurality of waypoints (See at least Figs. 8-9, and [0120]: the flight path information 832, 922 include a full or partial flight path comprising one or more waypoints, with each waypoint including a waypoint ID, a location [i.e., a location … for respective waypoints], and a timestamp [i.e., a timestamp for respective waypoints]. Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the flight path information includes a location and a timestamp. That is, the first and second flight path information each include respective locations and timestamps for a plurality of waypoints).
In regard to claim 18
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 16, wherein the UE assistance information is received if the location or timestamp for one or more waypoints is different in the second flight path information than the first flight path information (See at least Fig. 8, and [0022 & 0105 & 0111]: as an example of configuring the target UE 801 for partial flight path reporting, the network entity 802, such as the flight path request unit 650, produces the request 822 to provide one or more spatial offsets and a temporal offset. Using Cartesian coordinates, the request 822 indicates x, y, and z coordinates of a reference location, indicates an x-offset Δx, a y-offset Δy, and/or a z-offset Δz, indicates a reference time t, and indicates a time offset Δt. The offsets indicates to the target UE 801 to exclude any waypoint in the flight path 710 whose location is outside of a volume, around the reference location, defined by x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz, or a timestamp beyond t+/−Δt. Examiner notes, as mentioned above, for partial flight path reporting, the waypoints are excluded based on the defined range of x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz, or a timestamp beyond t+/−Δt. When the location is within x+/−Δx, y+/−Δy and z+/−Δz range, the location is excluded and the change is not reported. However, when the location is outside the defined range above, then the location is not excluded and the change is reported. That is, the change is reported if the change is in the location of one or more of the waypoints but not if the change is in the timestamp of one or more of the waypoints. The original flight path of the UE is the first flight path and when the UE changes its location which is outside of the defined ranges above, then the first flight path is deviated from the first flight path based on its location, which is a trigger event, as described in the parent claim, for sending a message to the network entity or the Base Station. Accordingly, Saha teaches receiving UE assistance information if the location or timestamp for one or more waypoints is different in the second flight path information than the first flight path information).
In regard to claim 19
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 18, wherein the UE assistance information is received if the difference is greater than a threshold (See at least [0022 & 0111]: the UE provides the flight path information in response to occurrence of a trigger event. A trigger event is defined as the spatial difference exceeding a spatial threshold [i.e., wherein the change is reported if the change is greater than a threshold] or the temporal difference exceeding a time threshold).
In regard to claim 20
, Saha, as modified by Phuyal, teaches the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 19, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the gNB to replace the first flight path information with the second flight path information (See at least Fig. 8, and [0113]: the flight path is updated due to deviations from the expected flight path. Examiner notes, the original flight path is the first flight path and the updated flight path due to deviation from the original flight path is the second flight path. As indicated by the parent claims, the updated flight path is sent to the Base Station (gNB). Updating the flight path is replacing the first flight path information with the second flight path information).
26. Claim(s) 14-15
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phuyal et al. (US-20220386208-A1) in view of Saha et al. (US-20220404484-A1).
In regard to claim 14
, Phuyal discloses the one or more non-transitory CRM of claim 13, accordingly the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated.
Phuyal is silent on wherein the UE assistance information is transmitted to the UE based on a determination that the change is greater than a threshold.
However, Saha teaches the UE provides the flight path information in response to occurrence of a trigger event. A trigger event is defined as the spatial difference exceeding a spatial threshold [i.e., wherein the UE assistance information is transmitted to the UE based on a determination that the change is greater than a threshold] or the temporal difference exceeding a time threshold (See at least [0022 & 0111]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the invention of Phuyal, by incorporating the teachings of Saha with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – communication systems, such that a message for informing the network entity is transmitted when the change in the flight path or the spatial difference exceeds a spatial threshold.
The motivation to modify is that, as acknowledged by Saha, to improve positioning accuracy for the UE and reduce latency of positioning for the UE (See at least [0023]) which one of ordinary skill would have recognized makes the flight safer.
In regard to claim 15
, Phuyal, as modified by Saha, teaches the one or more non-transitory CRM claim 14, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the UE to:
receive, from the gNB, a request for the updated flight path information based on the flag (See at least Fig. 4, and [0035 & 0072]: a Base station (BS) 105 is a station that communicates with UEs 115 and it is referred to as an evolved node B (eNB), a next generation eNB (gNB), an access point, and the like. An event may occur at a waypoint and/or during travel between waypoints that causes the flight path information to change. At 420, the UE transmits a message to the target BS indicating that new flight path information is available. The UE transmits a flag, newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, in a message to the target BS. In response to receiving the newFlightPathInfoAvailable flag, at 422 the target BS transmits a message requesting the new flight path information. Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the BS (or gNB), transmits a request to the UE based on the flag. The UE receives the message. Accordingly, Phuyal teaches receiving, from the gNB, a request for the updated flight path information based on the flag); and
encode the updated flight path information for transmission to the gNB based on the request (See at least Fig. 4 and [0073 & 0095]: At 424, in response to receiving the request for the new flight path information, the UE transmits the new (e.g., updated) flight path information [i.e., the updated flight path information]. The transceiver 710 is configured to communicate bi-directionally with other devices, such as the BSs 105 [i.e., the gNB]. The modem subsystem 712 is configured to modulate and/or encode the data from the flight path update module 709 [encode the updated flight path information for transmission] according to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). Examiner notes, as mentioned above, the modem subsystem, which is responsible for sending and receiving messages, encodes the data included in the messages, including the flight path update data. Accordingly, Phuyal teaches encoding the updated flight path information for transmission to the gNB based on the request).
Conclusion
27. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Phuyal et al. (US-20180324580-A1) teaches a method of operating a drone-coupled user equipment (UE), including transmitting a message to a network component of a terrestrial wireless communication subscriber network that identifies a drone-coupled capability information of the drone-coupled UE.
Faccin (US-12148315-B2) teaches exchanging of flight path information between a mobile network and an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).
28. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Preston J Miller whose telephone number is (703)756-1582. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
29. 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.
30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571) 272-6011. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
31. 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.
/P.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/MATTHIAS S WEISFELD/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights