Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/451,779

USER EQUIPMENT AND BASE STATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, AND METHODS PERFORMED BY THE SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 21, 2021
Examiner
TRAN, THINH D
Art Unit
2466
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 5m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
330 granted / 532 resolved
+4.0% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
571
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 532 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 16, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument in pages 8-10, the applicant asserts that “Claim 16, as amended, renders the rejection moot because the proposed combination of references as cited in the Office Action does not teach or suggest at least to "determining a timing advance based on all of the common timing advance, the absolute timing advance, and a timing advance related to a satellite, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite is estimated by the UE" as recited in Claim 16.” Examiner respectively disagrees since as indicated by the office action that GHANBARINEJAD et al. (US 20230362857) in par. 196, 203, 204, which determine the TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift or the TAnew:=TAold+TA3 and UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2, which TA1 is consider as the common TA as indicated by par. 148-154, 287, TAref is the common TA and TA1=TAref and the TA3 is consider as the absolute TA as indicated by par. 201, 233, 234, 235, 239, 241, 289, The value of TA3 may be positive, zero, or negative… a MAC CE message comprising the value of TA3 and TA2 or TAdrift is consider as the timing advance related to the satellite is estimated by the UE as indicated by par. 136, 150. Therefore, the determine the TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift or the TAnew:=TAold+TA3 and UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2 would consider as “determining a timing advance based on all of the common timing advance, the absolute timing advance, and a timing advance related to a satellite, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite is estimated by the UE;”. Therefore, the combination of the references would teach the claims. The rejection is maintained. 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. Claim(s) 16, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GHANBARINEJAD et al. (US 20230362857 as supported by provisional app. 63078797 filed on 09/15/2020) in view of LI et al. (US 20230095158 with continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/098249 filed on 06/24/2020) and SHA et al. (US 20220322127 with continuation of PCT/CN2020/107982 filed on 08/07/2020). Regarding claim 16, 23, GHANBARINEJAD et al. (US 20230362857) teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (fig. 1A, 1B, UE), the method including: receiving, from a base station, a system information block (SIB) including a common timing advance (fig. 8 block 860, par. 135, 148-154, 156, 211, 237, 287, obtain TA1 from SIB… NT-TRP broadcasts TA.sub.ref in SIB…TA1:=TAref… The reference TA may consider the TA change due to a propagation delay from the satellite to the ground as well as a delay to apply the reference TA… the common TA value (also referred to as the reference TA value); par. 107, 135, the common TA, which refers to the common component of propagation delay shared by all UEs within the coverage of same satellite beam/cell…TA1 can be computed by calculating the propagation delay associated with the distance between the NT-TRP and the UE); receiving, from the base station, an absolute timing advance in a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) (par. 148-154, 201, 233, 234, 235, 239, 241, 289, the NT-TRP transmits a control message such as a MAC CE message comprising the value of TA3); determining a timing advance based on all of the common timing advance, the absolute timing advance, and a timing advance related to a satellite, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite is estimated by the UE (par. 136, If the UE obtains the velocity of the satellite, VTRP, and/or its own velocity, VUE, in one embodiment, the UE may compute a TA drift rate associated with the relative velocity; par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground; par. 196, UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2; par. 203, 204, TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift…TAnew:=TAold+TA3); and transmitting, to the base station, an uplink signal based on the timing advance (par. 102, 194-196, 205, 241, The UE, in one embodiment, adds the value of TA3 to the current timing advance value for transmitting a next uplink signal). However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach reporting, to the base station, the timing advance based on a difference between information on the timing advance and last reported information on the timing advance exceeds a threshold; But, LI et al. (US 20230095158) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches receiving, from the base station, second information on an absolute timing advance in a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) (par. 60, If the TA value of a certain terminal device needs to be corrected, the network device will send a timing advance command to the terminal device, asking it to adjust the TA value. The timing advance command is sent to the terminal device through MAC CE of the timing advance command); determining a timing advance based on the common timing advance the absolute timing advance (par. 60, 76, 77, 103, The relative TA value is a TA change of the absolute TA value relative to a last TA value obtained by the terminal device); reporting, to the base station, the timing advance based on a difference between information on the timing advance and last reported information on the timing advance exceeds a threshold (par. 72, 78, 103, 122, 123, reporting the timing advance when greater or equal than threshold); Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LI in the system of GHANBARINEJAD to report the TA. The motivation would have been to maintain up to date timing advance for synchronization. However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach reporting, to the base station, the timing advance based a configuration indicating whether to report the timing advance is included in the SIB. But, SHA et al. (US 20220322127) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches reporting, to the base station, the timing advance based a configuration indicating whether to report the timing advance is included in the SIB (par. 122, 132, an uplink timing advance (TA) value reporting indication and/or a downlink TA value reporting indication, and the measurement report message comprises the uplink TA values and/or a downlink TA values… the measurement request message is a system information block (SIB)). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by SHA in the system of GHANBARINEJAD and LI to control TA report. The motivation would have been to request on demand and reduce traffic on network. Regarding claims 19, 26, GHANBARINEJAD teaches the method according to claim 16, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite is estimated by the UE based on a distance between the satellite and the UE (par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground, while UEs are expected to be spatially scattered; par. 135, 178, TA1 can be computed by calculating the propagation delay associated with the distance between the gateway and the NT-TRP plus the distance between the NT-TRP and the UE; par. 244). Regarding claim 21, 28, GHANBARINEJAD teaches the method according to claim 16, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite (par. 136, If the UE obtains the velocity of the satellite, VTRP, and/or its own velocity, VUE, in one embodiment, the UE may compute a TA drift rate associated with the relative velocity; par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground; par. 196, UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2; par. 203, 204, TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift…TAnew:=TAold+TA3). However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach wherein the timing advance is reported through an MAC CE. But, LI et al. (US 20230095158) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the timing advance is reported through an MAC CE (par. 107, 149). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LI in the system of GHANBARINEJAD and SHA to report the TA. The motivation would have been to maintain up to date timing advance for synchronization. Regarding claim 22, 29, GHANBARINEJAD teach the method according to claim 16, wherein the SIB further includes a timing offset (par. 211, 222, 223, the NT-TRP broadcasts additional information, for example in one or multiple system information blocks (“SIBs”)… the broadcast information may comprise additional information specific to NTN such as the following:…Propagation delay of a service link, e.g., propagation delay from the satellite/UAV to a reference point (normally on the ground)… Drift rate of the above propagation delay as a function of time; propagation delay or drift rate would consider as timing offset). Regarding claim 30, GHANBARINEJAD et al. (US 20230362857) teaches a base station (fig. 1A, 1B, NT-TRP), the base station comprising: a transceiver (fig. 1A, 1B, NT-TRP); and a controller coupled with the transceiver (fig. 1A, 1B, NT-TRP) and configured to: transmit, to a user equipment, UE, a system information block (SIB) including a common timing advance (fig. 8 block 860, par. 135, 156, 211, 237, obtain TA1 from SIB; par. 107, 135, the common TA, which refers to the common component of propagation delay shared by all UEs within the coverage of same satellite beam/cell…TA1 can be computed by calculating the propagation delay associated with the distance between the NT-TRP and the UE), transmit, to the UE, an absolute timing advance in a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) (par. 201, 233, 234, 235, 239, 241, 289, the NT-TRP transmits a control message such as a MAC CE message comprising the value of TA3), wherein the timing advance related to a satellite is estimated by the UE (par. 136, If the UE obtains the velocity of the satellite, VTRP, and/or its own velocity, VUE, in one embodiment, the UE may compute a TA drift rate associated with the relative velocity; par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground; par. 196, UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2; par. 203, 204, TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift…TAnew:=TAold+TA3), and receive, from the UE, an uplink signal based on a timing advance, wherein the timing advance is determined based on all of the common timing advance, the absolute timing advance, and the timing advance related to the satellite (par. 136, If the UE obtains the velocity of the satellite, VTRP, and/or its own velocity, VUE, in one embodiment, the UE may compute a TA drift rate associated with the relative velocity; par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground; par. 196, UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2; par. 203, 204, TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift…TAnew:=TAold+TA3). However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach receive, from the UE, a timing advance based on a difference between information on a timing advance and last reported information on the timing advance exceeds a threshold. But, LI et al. (US 20230095158) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches transmitting, from the base station, second information on an absolute timing advance in a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) (par. 60, If the TA value of a certain terminal device needs to be corrected, the network device will send a timing advance command to the terminal device, asking it to adjust the TA value. The timing advance command is sent to the terminal device through MAC CE of the timing advance command); determining a timing advance based on the common timing advance the absolute timing advance (par. 60, 76, 77, 103, The relative TA value is a TA change of the absolute TA value relative to a last TA value obtained by the terminal device); receive, from the UE, a timing advance based on a difference between information on a timing advance and last reported information on the timing advance exceeds a threshold (par. 72, 78, 103, 122, 123, reporting the timing advance when greater or equal than threshold); Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LI in the system of GHANBARINEJAD to report the TA. The motivation would have been to maintain up to date timing advance for synchronization. However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach receive, from the UE, a timing advance based on a configuration indicating whether to report the timing advance is included in the SIB. But, SHA et al. (US 20220322127) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches receive, from the UE, a timing advance based on a configuration indicating whether to report the timing advance is included in the SIB (par. 122, 132, an uplink timing advance (TA) value reporting indication and/or a downlink TA value reporting indication, and the measurement report message comprises the uplink TA values and/or a downlink TA values… the measurement request message is a system information block (SIB)). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by SHA in the system of GHANBARINEJAD and LI to control TA report. The motivation would have been to request on demand and reduce traffic on network. Regarding claim 31, GHANBARINEJAD teaches the base station according to claim 30, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite is reported by the UE based on a distance between the satellite and the UE (par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground, while UEs are expected to be spatially scattered; par. 135, 178, TA1 can be computed by calculating the propagation delay associated with the distance between the gateway and the NT-TRP plus the distance between the NT-TRP and the UE; par. 244). Regarding claim 33, GHANBARINEJAD teaches the base station according to claim 30, wherein the timing advance related to the satellite (par. 136, If the UE obtains the velocity of the satellite, VTRP, and/or its own velocity, VUE, in one embodiment, the UE may compute a TA drift rate associated with the relative velocity; par. 158, The value of TA2 may be significantly different for different UEs as the delay computed for propagation from the satellite to the ground corresponds to a reference point on the ground; par. 196, UE applies TA3 on top of TA1+TA2; par. 203, 204, TAnew:=TAold+TA3+TAdrift…TAnew:=TAold+TA3). However, GHANBARINEJAD does not teach wherein the timing advance is reported through an MAC CE. But, LI et al. (US 20230095158) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the timing advance is reported through an MAC CE (par. 107, 149). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LI in the system of GHANBARINEJAD and SHA to report the TA. The motivation would have been to maintain up to date timing advance for synchronization. Regarding claim 34, GHANBARINEJAD teach the base station according to claim 30, wherein the SIB further includes a timing offset (par. 211, 222, 223, the NT-TRP broadcasts additional information, for example in one or multiple system information blocks (“SIBs”)… the broadcast information may comprise additional information specific to NTN such as the following:…Propagation delay of a service link, e.g., propagation delay from the satellite/UAV to a reference point (normally on the ground)… Drift rate of the above propagation delay as a function of time; propagation delay or drift rate would consider as timing offset). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. MA et al. (US 20210194571) teaches the expiry timer for a TA update at an airborne sub-system or a satellite sub-system may be configured with a large value, the expiry timer for a TA update at a low-height flying sub-system may be configured with a medium value, and the expiry timer for a TA update at a terrestrial sub-system may be configured with a low value (fig. 1F, par. 189). CHENG et al. (US 20220124660) teaches When the UE reports a UE autonomous TA to the network by receiving an indication or a request from the network, the UE may apply the reported value (e.g., the absolute TA applied for PRACH preamble) to derive MAC-CE latency (par. 88). Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6. 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, FARUK HAMZA can be reached at 5712727969. 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. /THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 02/06/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 21, 2021
Application Filed
Sep 23, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
May 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 21, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 31, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 07, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603833
ALLOCATING A PACKET TO A MEDIA SESSION CONTROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12568531
MESSAGE SENDING METHOD AND DEVICE, MESSAGE CONFIGURATION METHOD AND DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557150
Radio Resource Control RRC Connection Method and Apparatus and RRC Reconnection Method and Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12543201
Access Procedure Resource Configuration
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12543233
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, AND PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+20.0%)
4y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 532 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month