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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13,15-19,21-29,31-35,37-41 and 43-47 have been considered but are moot based on new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendments.
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 19, 21-29, 37-41, 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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 claim 19: lines 11-15 includes “the timing advance value for the target cell derived from a timing advance value for the source cell based at least in part on a timing offset that is used to derive, prior to obtainment of the uplink communication, both the timing advance value for the source cell and the timing advance value for the target cell”, however, claim language is ambiguous as to whether the limitation is performed at the network entity, performed by a UE somehow controlled by the network entity, or is intended to be a system claim including the network entity and UE. Examination continued on the assumption the limitation is performed by a UE.
Regarding claim 21: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19. Further, lines 4-5 includes “determine that the network entity serves the target cell based at least in part on the identifier”, however, claim language is ambiguous as to whether the limitation is performed at the network entity, performed by a UE somehow controlled by the network entity, or is intended to be a system claim including the network entity and UE. Examination continued on the assumption the limitation is performed by a UE.
Regarding claim 22: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19. Further, lines 3-5 includes “determine a timing value for an estimated timing advance based at least in part on the source cell and the target cell being served by the network entity, wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing value”, however, claim language is ambiguous as to whether the limitation is performed at the network entity, performed by a UE somehow controlled by the network entity, or is intended to be a system claim including the network entity and UE. Examination continued on the assumption the limitation is performed by a UE.
Regarding claim 23: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19. Further, lines 3-5 includes “determine a timing value for random access channel transmission based at least in part on the source cell and the target cell being served by the network entity, wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing value”, however, claim language is ambiguous as to whether the limitation is performed at the network entity, performed by a UE somehow controlled by the network entity, or is intended to be a system claim including the network entity and UE. Examination continued on the assumption the limitation is performed by a UE.
Regarding claim 24: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 25: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 26: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 27: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 19 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 28: lines 8-10 includes “wherein the timing offset is associated with the source cell and is for use in derivation of both a timing advance value for the source cell and a timing advance value for the target cell; and obtain an uplink communication in accordance with the timing advance value for the target cell, wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing offset”, however, claim language is ambiguous as to whether the limitation is performed at the network entity, performed by a UE somehow controlled by the network entity, or is intended to be a system claim including the network entity and UE. Examination continued on the assumption the limitation is performed by a UE.
Regarding claim 29: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 28 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 28.
Regarding claim 37: the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 38: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 37 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 37. Further, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 21.
Regarding claim 39: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 37 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 37. Further, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 22.
Regarding claim 40: the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 28.
Regarding claim 41: the claim, ultimately dependent upon claim 40 and thus inherits the same issues, is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 40.
Regarding claim 45: the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 37.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 12-13, 28, 34-35, 40-41, 44, and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ciochina et al. (US 2023/0024479 A1) hereinafter Ciochina479.
Regarding claim 12, Ciochina479 teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (UE; para. 49-51 and Fig. 1), comprising: one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1) and configured to cause the UE to: receive, from a source cell served by a network entity comprising a communications device, signaling that triggers a handover to a target cell (receive instruction from source cell to perform handover from source cell to target cell; para. 112-114); receive a first information element that indicates a timing offset associated with the source cell (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of first [source] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]), wherein the UE uses the timing offset to derive both a timing advance value for the source cell (received data used to determine timing advance for first [source] cell; para. [42-45, 90-91]) and a timing advance value for the target cell (received data used to determine timing advance for second [target] cell; para. [42-45, 90-91]); and transmit, to the target cell, an uplink communication in accordance with the timing advance value for the target cell (UE performs uplink transmission to target cell based on timing advance of target cell; para. 221-223 and Fig. 6 step S14), the timing advance value for the target cell derived by the UE based at least in part on the timing offset (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of first [source] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]).
Regarding claim 13, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 12.
Ciochina479 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: receive a second information element that indicates the target cell is served by the network entity (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of second [target] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]), the timing advance value for the target cell derived based at least in part on the second information element (UE performs uplink transmission to target cell based on timing advance of target cell; para. 221-223 and Fig. 6 step S14, receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of second [target] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]).
Regarding claim 28, Ciochina479 teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity comprising a communications device (base station at satellite; para. [115-117, 127-129]), comprising: one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]) and configured to cause the network entity to: output signaling that triggers a handover from a source cell to a target cell (base station transmits to UE instruction to perform handover from source cell to target cell; para. 112-114); output a first information element that indicates a timing offset to a user equipment (UE), wherein the timing offset is associated with the source cell (UE receives data from base station corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of first [source] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]) and is for use in derivation of both a timing advance value for the source cell (received data used by UE to determine timing advance for first [source] cell; para. [42-45, 90-91]) and a timing advance value for the target cell (received data used by UE to determine timing advance for second [target] cell; para. [42-45, 90-91]); and obtain an uplink communication in accordance with the timing advance value for the target cell (UE performs uplink transmission to target cell based on timing advance of target cell; para. 221-223 and Fig. 6 step S14), wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing offset (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of first [source] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]).
Regarding claim 34: the claim is interpreted and objected to for substantially the same reason as claim 12.
Regarding claim 35, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 13.
Regarding claim 40, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 28.
Regarding claim 41, Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 40.
Ciochina479 further teaches outputting a second information element that indicates the target cell is served by the network entity (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of second [target] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]).
Regarding claim 44, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 12, including non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 46, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 28, including non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7, 11, 19, 22-23, 27, 31-32, 37, 39, 43, and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsubishi Electric (R1-2105947 “UL time synchronization acquisition for NTN”, made of record in the IDS of 5/15/2023) hereinafter Mitsubishi, in view of Ciochina479.
Regarding claim 1, Mitsubishi teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (UE estimates timing advance; page 1 section 1), receive, from a source cell served by a network entity comprising a communications device, signaling that triggers a handover to a target cell (radio resource control connected UE [connected and receiving commands from source cell] handover command received including assistance information for handover from source cell deployed on satellite [network entity] to target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Proposal 3); receive a first set of parameters associated with the target cell and a second set of parameters associated with the source cell (round trip time (RTT) of source cell [first set] and target cell [second set] known by network and unknown by UE; page 4 Observation 2 - page 4 Observation 3, UE uses [receives] RTT of source cell and target cell to deduce ΔRP of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4), wherein an evaluation of the first set of parameters and the second set of parameters indicates that the target cell is served by the network entity (ΔRP=0 when source cell and target cell served by same satellite, UE deduces ΔRP using RTT of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4, different acquiring / determining timing advance methods by UE for cells served by same satellite and for cells served by different satellites; page 2 section 2 - page 5 Proposal 3).
While Mitsubishi discusses preparation for uplink transmission, determining timing advance based on timing offset, and having the same timing advance for co-located cells, Mitsubishi does not explicitly disclose comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and configured to cause the UE to: transmit, to the target cell, an uplink communication in accordance with a timing advance value for the target cell, the timing advance value for the target cell derived by the UE from a timing advance value for the source cell based at least in part on the target cell being served by the network entity and based at least in part on a timing offset that is used by the UE to derive both the timing advance value for the source cell and the timing advance value for the target cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina479 teaches comprising: one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1) and configured to cause the UE to: transmit, to the target cell, an uplink communication in accordance with a timing advance value for the target cell (UE performs uplink transmission to target cell based on timing advance of target cell; para. 221-223 and Fig. 6 step S14), the timing advance value for the target cell derived by the UE from a timing advance value for the source cell based at least in part on the target cell being served by the network entity (timing advance value for target cell is determined [derived] to be the same as timing advance value of first [source] cell when target cell and first cell are co-located / served by same satellite; para. 161) and based at least in part on a timing offset that is used by the UE to derive both the timing advance value for the source cell and the timing advance value for the target cell (timing offset of base stations [cells] supported by satellite based on offset and generic value specific to satellite; para. 196, timing offset for timing advance of source cell used to determine timing advance of target cell; para. 214, UE determines timing advance for target cell based on timing advance for source cell; para. 216-217 and Fig. 6 step S13, UE determines timing advance for source cell and timing advance of target cell using offset from generic value; para. 263-267).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the system of Mitsubishi, where Mitsubishi’s reduced RACH resources during handover (page 6 section 2.3) along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: compare the first set of parameters associated with the target cell to the second set of parameters associated with the source cell (UE deduces ΔRP using RTT of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4); and determine that the network entity serves the target cell based at least in part on the comparison (ΔRP=0 when source cell and target cell served by same satellite; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: determine a timing value added to an estimated timing advance at the UE based at least in part on the target cell being served by the network entity (UE determines timing advance value based on summation including user specific value of satellite RTT(UE-satellite) [target cell served by network entity] and RTT(reference point-satellite) [target cell served by network entity]; page 3 section 2.1 - page 3 Proposal 1), the timing advance value for the target cell derived from the timing value (UEs using self-acquired timing advance use RTT(UE-satellite) and RTT(reference point-satellite); page 3 section 2.1 - page 3 Proposal 1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Mitsubishi discloses determining timing advance in relation to RACH, Mitsubishi does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: determine a timing value for random access channel transmission based at least in part on the target cell being served by the network entity, the timing advance value for the target cell derived from the timing value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina479 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: determine a timing value for random access channel transmission (uplink transmission after determining timing advance based on timing advance value includes random access channel (RACH) transmission; para. [199, 212-216, 224] and Fig. 6 steps S12-S14) based at least in part on the target cell being served by the network entity (satellite generic value [timing advance value] specific to base stations [source cell and target cell served by same satellite] supported by satellite; para. 194-196), the timing advance value for the target cell derived from the timing value (satellite generic value used to determine timing advance of target cell; para. [194-196, 212-216] and Fig. 6 steps S12-S13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein to receive the first set of parameters, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive, from the source cell, the first set of parameters associated with the target cell (RTT of source cell [first set] and target cell [second set] known by network and unknown by UE; page 4 Observation 2 - page 4 Observation 3, UE uses [receives] RTT of source cell and target cell to deduce ΔRP of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a handover command (perform handover as part of handover command; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) or a fulfilled conditional handover or both.
Regarding claim 19, Mitsubishi teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity comprising a communications device (serving satellite communicating with UE; page 1 section 1), output signaling that triggers a handover from a source cell to a target cell (handover command from satellite received by UE including assistance information for handover from source cell deployed on satellite [network entity] to target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Proposal 3); output a first set of parameters associated with the target cell (round trip time (RTT) of source cell [first set] and target cell [second set] known by network and unknown by UE; page 4 Observation 2 - page 4 Observation 3, UE uses [output by satellite] RTT of source cell and target cell to deduce ΔRP of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4), wherein the first set of parameters indicates that the source cell and the target cell are served by the network entity (ΔRP=0 when source cell and target cell served by same satellite, UE deduces ΔRP using RTT of source cell and target cell; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4, different acquiring / determining timing advance methods by UE for cells served by same satellite and for cells served by different satellites; page 2 section 2 - page 5 Proposal 3).
While Mitsubishi discusses preparation for uplink transmission, determining timing advance based on timing offset, and having the same timing advance for co-located cells, Mitsubishi does not explicitly disclose configured to cause the network entity to: obtain an uplink communication from a user equipment (UE) in accordance with a timing advance value for the target cell, the timing advance value for the target cell derived from a timing advance value for the source cell based at least in part on a timing offset that is used to derive, prior to obtainment of the uplink communication, both the timing advance value for the source cell and the timing advance value for the target cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina479 teaches comprising: one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]) configured to cause the network entity to: obtain an uplink communication from a user equipment (UE) in accordance with a timing advance value for the target cell (UE performs uplink transmission to target cell based on timing advance of target cell; para. 221-223 and Fig. 6 step S14), the timing advance value for the target cell derived from a timing advance value for the source cell (timing advance value for target cell is determined [derived] to be the same as timing advance value of first [source] cell when target cell and first cell are co-located / served by same satellite; para. 161) based at least in part on a timing offset that is used to derive, prior to obtainment of the uplink communication, both the timing advance value for the source cell and the timing advance value for the target cell (timing offset of base stations [cells] supported by satellite based on offset and generic value specific to satellite; para. 196, timing offset for timing advance of source cell used to determine timing advance of target cell; para. 214, UE determines timing advance for target cell based on timing advance for source cell; para. 216-217 and Fig. 6 step S13, UE determines timing advance for source cell and timing advance of target cell using offset from generic value; para. 263-267).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the system of Mitsubishi, where Mitsubishi’s reduced RACH resources during handover (page 6 section 2.3) along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: determine a timing value for an estimated timing advance based at least in part on the source cell and the target cell being served by the network entity (UE determines timing advance value based on summation including user specific value of satellite RTT(UE-satellite) [target cell served by network entity] and RTT(reference point-satellite) [target cell served by network entity]; page 3 section 2.1 - page 3 Proposal 1), wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing value (UEs using self-acquired timing advance use RTT(UE-satellite) and RTT(reference point-satellite); page 3 section 2.1 - page 3 Proposal 1).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
While Mitsubishi discloses determining timing advance in relation to RACH, Mitsubishi does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: determine a timing value for random access channel transmission based at least in part on the source cell and the target cell being served by the network entity, wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina479 further teaches
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: determine a timing value for random access channel transmission (uplink transmission after determining timing advance based on timing advance value includes random access channel (RACH) transmission; para. [199, 212-216, 224] and Fig. 6 steps S12-S14) based at least in part on the source cell and the target cell being served by the network entity (satellite generic value [timing advance value] specific to base stations [source cell and target cell served by same satellite] supported by satellite; para. 194-196), wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is based at least in part on the timing value (satellite generic value used to determine timing advance of target cell; para. [194-196, 212-216] and Fig. 6 steps S12-S13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
Mitsubishi further teaches wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a handover command (perform handover as part of handover command; page 4 Observation 3 - page 5 Observation 4, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) or a fulfilled conditional handover or both.
Regarding claim 31, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 32, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 37, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 39, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 22.
Regarding claim 43, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code (program code in memory read by processor; para. 165 and Fig. 1: Ciochina479).
Regarding claim 45, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19, including non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code (program code in memory read by processor; para. [115-117, 127-129]: Ciochina479).
Claim(s) 3, 6, 8, 21, 24, 33, 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsubishi in view of Ciochina479, and further in view of Huang et al. (US 2022/0191762 A1) hereinafter Huang.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses identifying satellite, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive, via a system information block, the first set of parameters that include an identifier of the network entity; and determine the network entity to serve the target cell based at least in part on the identifier.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive, via a system information block, the first set of parameters that include an identifier of the network entity (UE receives SIB including PLMN ID of target cell; para. 60 and Fig. 3); and determine the network entity to serve the target cell based at least in part on the identifier (determine whether PLMN ID of target is same as PLMN ID of source; para. 60 and Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Huang’s improved success in cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [37-38, 88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses system information block (SIB) including data related to timing advance, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein to receive the first set of parameters, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive, from the target cell, a system information block that includes the first set of parameters associated with the target cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein to receive the first set of parameters, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive, from the target cell, a system information block that includes the first set of parameters associated with the target cell (UE receives SIB of target cell including data of target cell for determining similarity between source cell and target cell; para. 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Huang’s improved success in cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [37-38, 88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Mitsubishi discloses preparing uplink transmission and performing handover, Mitsubishi does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: perform the handover to the target cell based at least in part on the transmission of the uplink communication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina479 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: perform the handover to the target cell based at least in part on the transmission of the uplink communication (handover procedure using RACH procedure [uplink communication]; para. 61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses antenna panels, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose an antenna array.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches further comprising an antenna array (UE includes antenna array; para. 107 and Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Huang’s improved success in cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [37-38, 88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses identifying satellite, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: output an identifier of the network entity; and determine that the network entity serves the target cell based at least in part on the identifier.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: output an identifier of the network entity (UE receives SIB including PLMN ID of target cell; para. 60 and Fig. 3); and determine that the network entity serves the target cell based at least in part on the identifier (determine whether PLMN ID of target is same as PLMN ID of source; para. 60 and Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Huang’s cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses system information block (SIB) including data related to timing advance, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose further comprising an antenna array, wherein to output the first set of parameters, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: output a system information block that includes the first set of parameters associated with the target cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches further comprising an antenna array, wherein to output the first set of parameters, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: output a system information block that includes the first set of parameters associated with the target cell (UE receives SIB of target cell including data of target cell for determining similarity between source cell and target cell; para. 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Huang’s cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 33, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 38, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 21.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsubishi in view of Ciochina479, and further in view of Ciochina et al. (US 2024/0204866 A1) hereinafter Ciochina866.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses cell-specific RTT and MAC control elements, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the first set of parameters comprises at least one of a medium access control layer parameter, a cell-specific offset, or both.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina866 teaches wherein the first set of parameters comprises at least one of a medium access control layer parameter (timing advance for source cell communicated via medium access control-Control Element (MAC-CE) signaling [MAC layer] includes Timing Advanced Command (TAC) [parameter within MAC-CE], MAC-CE TAC includes parameter including estimated timing advance; para. 266-267, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference), a cell-specific offset, or both.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina866 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Ciochina866’s handovers in satellite communications (para. [03, 12]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Mitsubishi, Ciochina479, and Ciochina866 teaches the limitation of previous claim 9.
The combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the medium access control layer parameter comprises a scheduling offset parameter other than a cell-specific offset parameter.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina866 teaches wherein the medium access control layer parameter comprises a scheduling offset parameter other than a cell-specific offset parameter (TA for source cell communicated via MAC-CE signaling includes TAC, MAC-CE TAC includes parameter including estimated timing advance [scheduling offset]; para. 266-267).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina866 to the modified system of Mitsubishi, Ciochina479, and Ciochina866, where Mitsubishi, Ciochina479, and Ciochina866’s modified system along with Ciochina866’s handovers in satellite communications (para. [03, 12]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
While the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 discloses cell-specific RTT and MAC control elements, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the first set of parameters comprises at least one of a medium access control layer parameter, a cell-specific offset, or both.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina866 teaches wherein the first set of parameters comprises at least one of a medium access control layer parameter (timing advance for source cell communicated via medium access control-Control Element (MAC-CE) signaling [MAC layer] includes Timing Advanced Command (TAC) [parameter within MAC-CE], MAC-CE TAC includes parameter including estimated timing advance; para. 266-267, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference), a cell-specific offset, or both.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina866 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Ciochina866’s handovers in satellite communications (para. [03, 12]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 25.
The combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the medium access control layer parameter comprises a scheduling offset parameter other than a cell-specific offset parameter.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ciochina866 teaches wherein the medium access control layer parameter comprises a scheduling offset parameter other than a cell-specific offset parameter (TA for source cell communicated via MAC-CE signaling includes TAC, MAC-CE TAC includes parameter including estimated timing advance [scheduling offset]; para. 266-267).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina866 to the modified system of Mitsubishi, Ciochina479, and Ciochina866, where Mitsubishi, Ciochina479, and Ciochina866’s modified system along with Ciochina866’s handovers in satellite communications (para. [03, 12]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina479 in view of Lauridsen et al. (US 2023/0072679 A1) hereinafter Lauridsen, and further in view of Tseng et al. (US 2023/0344508 A1) hereinafter Tseng.
Regarding claim 15, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 12.
Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: determine that the target cell is served by the network entity based at least in part on the timing advance command that includes the valid timing advance command value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lauridsen teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: determine that the target cell is served by the network entity based at least in part on the timing advance command that includes the valid timing advance command value (TA for target cell based on TA of source cell in intra-satellite (served by same entity) handover; para. 130-132, UE receives cell IDs combined with ephemeris or broadcast information [second information element] that indicates cells are collocated / originate from same satellite; para. [138, 175], client device assumes serving cell TA is valid [valid TA command value]; para. 141).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the system of Lauridsen, where Lauridsen’s appropriate random access procedure and selection for handovers after cell reselection (para. [02, 08, 84]) along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
The combination of Ciochina479 and Lauridsen does not explicitly disclose determine that a timing advance command comprises a valid timing advance command value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tseng teaches determine that a timing advance command comprises a valid timing advance command value (UE determines non-terrestrial network (NTN) assistance information is valid while validity timer is running; note (3) of Table 1 on page 9 and para. 110-112, NTN assistance information includes TA; para. 88).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Tseng to the modified system of Ciochina479 and Lauridsen, where Ciochina479 and Lauridsen’s modified system along with Tseng’s update of NTN assistance information (para. 04-08 and para. 106-107) improves user experience by enabling high reliability and low latency services.
Claim(s) 16 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina479 in view of Huang.
Regarding claim 16, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 12. Ciochina479 further teaches further comprising wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: perform the handover to the target cell based at least in part on the transmission of the uplink communication (handover procedure using RACH procedure [uplink communication]; para. 61).
Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose an antenna array.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches an antenna array (UE includes antenna array; para. 107 and Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the system of Ciochina479, where Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) along with Huang’s improved success in cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [37-38, 88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Regarding claim 29, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 28.
Ciochina479 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the network entity to: output a second information element that indicates the target cell is served by the network entity (receive data corresponding to offset used for timing advance of UE of second [target] cell; para. [40-45, 90-91]).
Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose further comprising an antenna array.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches further comprising an antenna array (UE includes antenna array; para. 107 and Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Huang to the system of Ciochina479, where Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) along with Huang’s improved success in cell reselection for handovers in vehicles (para. [37-38, 88-89, 154]) improves system efficiency by reducing signaling resources.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina479 in view of Lauridsen.
Regarding claim 17, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 12.
While Ciochina479 discloses a timing advance command, Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a timing advance command or the first information element or both.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lauridsen teaches wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a timing advance command (client device receives a timing advance command; para. 120, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) or the first information element or both.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the system of Lauridsen, where Lauridsen’s appropriate random access procedure and selection for handovers after cell reselection (para. [02, 08, 84]) along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Regarding claim 18, Ciochina479 discloses the limitation of previous claim 12.
Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a handover command or a fulfilled conditional handover or both.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lauridsen teaches wherein the signaling that triggers the handover comprises a handover command (client device receives handover command; para. 154, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) or a fulfilled conditional handover or both.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Ciochina479 to the system of Lauridsen, where Lauridsen’s appropriate random access procedure and selection for handovers after cell reselection (para. [02, 08, 84]) along with Ciochina479’s reduced computing, signaling, and latency during handover (para. 60) improves system efficiency by reducing resources used during handovers.
Claim(s) 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsubishi in view of Ciochina479, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0224207 A1) hereinafter Zhang207.
Regarding claim 47, the combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
The combination of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479 does not explicitly disclose wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is derived based at least in part on a second timing offset, a third timing offset, a common timing advance component, and a constant value, wherein the second timing offset comprises a fixed offset that is used to derive the timing advance value for the target cell or for both the target cell and the source cell, wherein the third timing offset is a UE-specific timing offset, and wherein the common timing advance component is associated with at least one of the source cell or the target cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang207 teaches wherein the timing advance value for the target cell is derived based at least in part on a second timing offset, a third timing offset, a common timing advance component, and a constant value (TTA=(NTA+NTA,UE-specific+NTA,common+NTA,offset)×Tc); para. 28, constant C; para. 61), wherein the second timing offset comprises a fixed offset that is used to derive the timing advance value for the target cell or for both the target cell and the source cell (NTA is defined as 0 for physical random access channel (PRACH) and updated based on TA Command field in msg2/msgB and a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) TA command; para. 30), wherein the third timing offset is a UE-specific timing offset (NTA,UE-specific is UE self-estimated TA to pre-compensate for the service link delay; para. 31), and wherein the common timing advance component is associated with at least one of the source cell or the target cell (NTA,common is network-controlled common TA, and may include any timing offset considered necessary by the network; para. 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Zhang207 to the modified system of Mitsubishi and Ciochina479, where Mitsubishi and Ciochina479’s modified system along with Zhang207’s synchronicity in random access (para. [27, 52]) improves system efficiency by ensuring proper operations during random access.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shin et al. (US 2024/0121737 A1) discloses a method and device for uplink transmission and reception in wireless communication system.
Shin et al. (US 2023/0189088 A1) discloses a method and device for transmitting and receiving signals in wireless communication system.
Wang et al. (US 2022/0295434 A1) discloses a communication method and apparatus.
Luo et al. (US 2023/0109710 A1) discloses an uplink timing method and communications apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 pm.
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/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights