iDETAILED ACTION
The amendments and remarks filed 5/29/2025 was received. Claims 3 and 12 were canceled. Claims 1-2, 4-11, and 13-22 are pending.
PRIOR ART
The following references are prior art:
1. (PTO-892 3/3/2025) Appl. No. 17/605,465 (Toeda) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) since it published as US 2022/0217664 A1, names another inventor (Teruaki Toeda), and was effectively filed Apr. 26, 2019 before Apr. 15, 2020 the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
2. (IDS 12/19/2022) 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 #105bis, Xi’an, China, 08 Apr – 12 Apr 2019, Tdoc R2-1904041 (“Ericsson”) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) since it published in Apr. 2019 before Apr. 15, 2020 the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Navstar GPS Space Segment/Navigation User Interfaces, Interface specification IS-GPS-200 (“Navstar”) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) since it published on Dec. 7, 2004 before Apr. 15, 2020 the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
CLAIM REJECTIONS — 35 U.S.C. 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:
35 U.S.C. 103 Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter.
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.
CLAIMS 1-2,4-11 AND 13-22
Claims 1-2,4-11 and 13-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toeda (US 2022/0217664 A1) in view of Ericsson (R2-1904041) and Navstar (IS-GPS-200).
Claim 1
With respect to claim 1, Toeda taught:
A time synchronization method (Toeda [0002] taught that the UE can perform time synchronization based on the reference time. Toeda [0075] FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a sequence of delivery processing 2 of a reference time.),
comprising: determining, by a central unit (CU), a first reference time of a terminal device, wherein the first reference time includes a timing at a reference point (Toeda FIG. 7 illustrates a message flow diagram including a UE 100, a gNB-DU 230, and a gNB-CU 210. Toeda [0073] taught that the reference time included in Time corresponds, for example, to the NR time in the gNB-DU 230 at a termination boundary of a System Information window (SI window), which is a period for transmitting system information, or at an SFN boundary immediately after the termination boundary. Toeda [0076] taught that the gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 based on a request from the gNB-CU 210, a predetermined timing, or the like (S11). In the present embodiment, a reference SFN XXX is transmitted as referenceSFN, and a reference time aaaa is transmitted as Time. The Examiner finds that Toeda taught determining (i.e., upon receiving the transmission at S11), by a central unit (CU) (i.e., gNB-CU 210), a first reference time (i.e., the reference time labeled “aaaa” transmitted to the UE 100) of a terminal device (i.e., UE 100), wherein the first reference time includes a timing at a reference point (i.e., the reference time is associated with reference SFN, indicating the SI window/SFN boundary point)),
the reference point includes a start boundary or an end boundary of a radio frame (Toeda taught [0072] A system frame number (reference SFN) assigned to a radio frame that serves as a reference is included in referenceSFN in the information element TimeReferenceinfoList. In addition, an NR time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN included in referenceSFN, is included in Time in the information element TimeReferenceinfoList as the reference time. [0073] Here, the reference time included in Time corresponds, for example, to the NR time in the gNB-DU 230 at a termination boundary of a System Information window (SI), window), which is a period for transmitting system information, or at an SFN boundary immediately after the termination boundary),
and sending, by the CU, first information to the terminal device, wherein the first information indicates the first reference time (Toeda [0079] taught that the gNB-CU 210 encodes the system information, and transmits the system information including the reference SFN and the reference time transmitted from the gNB-DU 230 to the gNB-DU 230 (S15). The gNB-DU 230 broadcasts the transmitted system information (S17). The Examiner finds that Toeda taught sending (i.e., at S15 and S17), by the CU (i.e., gNB-CU 210), first information (i.e., “system information”) to the terminal device (i.e., UE 100), wherein the first information indicates the first reference time (i.e., reference time “aaaa”)),
and determining the first reference time of the terminal device comprises: receiving second information from a distributed unit (DU), wherein the second information indicates a second reference time, the second reference time includes a reference time of the DU at the reference point (Toeda taught [0076] that the gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 based on a request from the gNB-CU 210, a predetermined timing, or the like (S11). [0077] The gNB-CU 210 includes the reference SFN transmitted from the gNB-DU 230 in referenceSFN of an information element TimeReferenceinfoList in system information, and includes the reference time transmitted from the gNB-DU 230 in Time of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList (S13). Toeda [0078] taught a reference time aaaa is included in Time of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList).
Toeda taught the limitations of claim 1 discussed above but did not explicitly teach “receiving… third information from a distributed unit (DU)… the third information is used to determine a unidirectional transmission delay between the DU and the terminal device; and determining the first reference time based on the second reference time and the unidirectional transmission delay.” See discussion of Ericsson below. Toeda also did not explicitly teach “wherein the second information includes a first value relative to a present time, the first value includes a plurality of time parameters corresponding to the second reference time, and the plurality of time parameters corresponds to different time precision.” See discussion of Navstar below.
Discussion of Ericsson
With respect to claim 1, Ericsson taught
the reference point includes a start boundary or an end boundary of a radio frame (Ericsson taught [p.1] SIB/RRC-unicast Method for Reference Time Provisioning… the method calls for delivering a reference time that corresponds to the end of a known system frame (SFN). [p.2] The current LTE Rel-15 method allows for: •Providing a UE with a reference time (clock) value and a corresponding reference SFN value to which the reference time corresponds. •The reference time field indicates the time at the ending boundary of the reference SFN that is nearest to the frame in which the reference time value is received. The Examiner notes that this limitation is also taught by Toeda as discussed above),
receiving… third information from a distributed unit (DU)… the third information is used to determine a unidirectional transmission delay between the DU and the terminal device; and determining the first reference time based on the second reference time and the unidirectional transmission delay (Ericsson taught [section 2.2] is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” [Section 2.2] taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation… the possibility of using the legacy Timing Advance MAC CE as the method for improving the reference time information (i.e. UE increases the reference time by ½ TA. [Section 5.7.1.1] taught The purpose of this procedure is to transfer NAS dedicated information or time reference information from NG-RAN to a UE in RRC_CONNECTED. The Examiner finds that ½ of TA reads on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device since the TA is used to account for propagation delay at the UE. The Examiner finds that while Ericsson does not explicitly mention the DU, it inherently describes the DU since Ericsson describes the information being received by the UE from the Network/NG-RAN, which includes the DU to perform the transmission. This is further clear because Ericsson is specifically a proposal directed to TR 38.331 which provides context regarding the DU).
The Examiner finds that it 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 to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the ½ Timing Advance described in Ericsson (reading on the third information used to determine the unidirectional transmission delay) is used to determine the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Implementing this modification would result in the TA being sent from the DU to the CU along with the reference time. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Discussion of Navstar
With respect to claim 1, Navstar taught:
wherein the second information includes a first value relative to a present time, the first value includes a plurality of time parameters corresponding to the second reference time, and the plurality of time parameters corresponds to different time precision (Navstar taught [p.40] 3.3.4 GPS Time and SV Z-Count. GPS time is established by the Control Segment and is referenced to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) as maintained by the U.S. Naval Observatory (UTC(USNO)) zero time-point defined as midnight on the night of January 5, 1980/morning of January 6, 1980. The largest unit used in stating GPS time is one week defined as 604,800 seconds. [p.41] In each [space vehicle] SV the X1 epochs of the P-code offer a convenient unit for precisely counting and communicating time. Time stated in this manner is referred to as Z-count, which is given as a 29-bit binary number consisting of two parts as follows: The binary number represented by the 19 least significant bits of the Z-count is referred to as the time of week (TOW) count and is defined as being equal to the number of X1 epochs that have occurred since the transition from the previous week. The count is short-cycled such that the range of the TOW-count is from 0 to 403,199 X1 epochs (equaling one week) and is reset to zero at the end of each week. The TOW count's zero state is defined as that X1 epoch which is coincident with the start of the present week. This epoch occurs at (approximately) midnight Saturday night-Sunday morning, where midnight is defined as 0000 hours on the UTC scale which is nominally referenced to the Greenwich Meridian… The ten most significant bits of the Z-count are a modulo 1024 binary representation of the sequential number assigned to the current GPS week (see paragraph 6.2.4). The range of this count is from 0 to 1023 with its zero state being defined as the GPS week number zero and every integer multiple of 1024 weeks, thereafter (i.e. 0, 1024, 2048, etc.). [p. 67] 20.3.2 Message Structure. As shown in Figure 20-1, the message structure shall utilize a basic format of a 1500 bit long frame made up of five subframes, each subframe being 300 bits long. Subframes 4 and 5 shall be subcommutated 25 times each, so that a complete data message shall require the transmission of 25 full frames. The 25 versions of subframes 4 and 5 shall be referred to herein as pages 1 through 25 of each subframe. Each subframe shall consist of ten words, each 30 bits long; the MSB of all words shall be transmitted first. [p.87] Table 20-I. Subframe 1 Parameters… Week No… TGD… toc, af2, af1, af0. [p. 130] 20.3.4.5 Reference Times. Many of the parameters which describe the SV state vary with true time, and must therefore be expressed as time functions with coefficients provided by the Navigation Message to be evaluated by the user equipment. These include the following parameters as functions of GPS time: a. SV time, b. Mean anomaly, c. Longitude of ascending node, d. UTC, e. Inclination. Each of these parameters is formulated as a polynomial in time. The specific time scale of expansion can be arbitrary. [p. 187] 30.3.3.8.2 GPS and GNSS Time. The GPS/GNSS-time relationship is given by, tGNSS = tE – (A0GGTO + A1GGTO (tE – totGGTO + 604800 (WN – WNotGGTO) + A2GGTO (tE – totGGTO + 604800 (WN – WNotGGTO))2) where tGNSS is in seconds, tE and WN are as defined in Section 20.3.3.5.2.4, and the remaining parameters are as defined in Table 30-XI. The Examiner finds that Navstar taught that the second information (i.e., GPS/GNSS reference time) includes a first value relative to a present time (i.e., the time is relative to midnight on the night of January 5, 1980/morning of January 6, 1980), the first value includes a plurality of time parameters corresponding to the second reference time, and the plurality of time parameters corresponds to different time precision (i.e., the parameters include time of week and current week relative to 12:00AM Jan. 6, 1980)).
The Examiner finds that it 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 to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the reference time of referenceSFN is configured in the known time reference format described in Navstar since doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Specifically, the Examiner makes the following findings: (1) the prior art (i.e., Toeda, Ericsson, and Navstar) included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference, as discussed above; (2) one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (i.e., GPS/GNSS is known in the art and the Navstar interface specification enables a person of ordinary skill to combine the elements as claimed by the known methods described there), and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (i.e., changing the format in which the time is presented does not change the function of how the time would be used in Toeda); (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (i.e., changing the time format is predictable since the resulting format and configuration are those described in Navstar).
The Examiner further notes that MPEP 2143.03 states: "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ." Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. The Examiner finds that no more skill or ingenuity would be required to achieve claim 1 in view of Toeda, Ericsson, and Navstar than that possessed by a person of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 2
With respect to claim 2, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 1 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 2, Toeda taught:
sending, by the DU, the second information to the CU, wherein the CU and the DU are included in a base station (Toeda [0043] taught that the gNB 200 includes the gNB-CU 210 and the gNB-DU 230. Toeda [0076] taught that the gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 based on a request from the gNB-CU 210, a predetermined timing, or the like (S11).).
Toeda taught the limitations of claim 2 discussed above but did not explicitly teach “sending, by the DU, … the third information to the CU.”
With respect to claim 2, Ericsson taught:
the third information used to determine a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device (Ericsson section 2.2 is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” Ericsson, section 22.2 taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns (from a total of 4 sources) for 15kHz SCS can be achieved independently of the ISD… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation).
As discussed above with respect to claim 1, Ericsson taught the “third information.” Ericsson section 2.2 taught “the need for delay compensation at the UE” to avoid reference time inaccuracy. Accordingly, when implementing Ericsson’s techniques into Toeda’s method would be obvious to “sending, by the DU, … the third information to the CU” along with the “second information” when the CU requests reference time for the DU as described in Toeda in order to prevent reference time inaccuracy as discussed in Ericsson.
The Examiner finds that it 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 to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the delay compensation information of Ericsson (reading on third information) is determined by the DU and sent to the CU along with the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson, particularly in large cell operations that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Claim 4
With respect to claim 4, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 1 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 4, Toeda taught:
sending, by the CU, first request information to the DU, the first request information comprises an identifier of the terminal device (Toeda [0096] taught that the gNB-CU 210 transmits a message creation instruction to the gNB-DU 230 in order to instruct the gNB-DU 230 to create an RRC message addressed to the UE 100 (S31)).
Toeda taught the limitations of claim 4 discussed above but did not explicitly teach “the first request information is used to request the unidirectional transmission delay” and “receiving, by the CU, the third information sent by the DU.”
Similar to Toeda, Ericsson taught in section 2.1 titled “SIB/RRC-unicast Method for Reference Time Provisioning” that “calls for delivering a reference time that corresponds to the end of a known system frame (SFN).”
With respect to claim 4, Ericsson taught:
determining reference time based on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device and providing the reference time using an identifier of the terminal device (Ericsson section 2.1 taught to use LTE rel-15 SIB/RRC unicast based methods for reference time delivery. Ericsson section 2.2 is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” Ericsson, section 22.2 taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation… the possibility of using the legacy Timing Advance MAC CE as the method for improving the reference time information (i.e. UE increases the reference time by ½ TA. The Examiner finds that ½ of TA reads on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device since the TA is used to account for propagation delay at the UE). The Examiner finds that an identifier of the terminal device/UE is used in providing the reference time since it is transmitted by RRC unicast).
The Examiner finds that it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the ½ Timing Advance described in Ericsson (reading on unidirectional transmission delay) is used to determine the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Implementing this modification would result in the TA being requested by the CU as in Toeda and the information being sent from the DU to the CU along with the reference time and an identifier of the terminal to be used for RRC unicast. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Claim 5
With respect to claim 5, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 4 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 5, Toeda taught:
further comprising: receiving, by the DU, the first request information from the CU; and sending, by the DU, information to the CU based on the first request information (Toeda [0089] taught that the gNB-CU 210 transmits a request signal to the gNB-DU 230 in order to request information related to a reference time from the gNB-DU 230 (S21). The gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 according to reception of the request signal (S23)).
Toeda taught the limitations of claim 5 above but did not explicitly teach that the information sent in response to the request includes “the third information.”
With respect to claim 5, Ericsson taught:
determining reference time based on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device (Ericsson section 2.1 taught to use LTE rel-15 SIB/RRC unicast based methods for reference time delivery. Ericsson section 2.2 is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” Ericsson, section 22.2 taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation… the possibility of using the legacy Timing Advance MAC CE as the method for improving the reference time information (i.e. UE increases the reference time by ½ TA. The Examiner finds that ½ of TA reads on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device since the TA is used to account for propagation delay at the UE). The Examiner finds that an identifier of the terminal device/UE is used in providing the reference time since it is transmitted by RRC unicast).
The Examiner finds that it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the ½ Timing Advance described in Ericsson (reading on unidirectional transmission delay of the third information) is used to determine the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Implementing this modification in Toeda, which uses a request and response, would result in the TA being requested by the CU and the information being sent from the DU to the CU along with the reference time. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Claim 6
With respect to claim 6, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 4 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 6, Toeda taught:
wherein the base station with split CU-DU is capable of delivering an accurate reference time to a user equipment accounting for delay (Toeda [0006] taught a Higher Layer Split (HLS) of CU-DU in which a lower layer such as a radio link control layer (RLC) is included in the gNB-DU, and a higher layer having a packet data convergence protocol layer (PDCP) and a layer higher than the PDCP is included in the gNB-CU. Toeda [0009] taught that in the NR system, in a case where the gNB-CU delivers the reference time to the UE using the RRC signaling, the gNB-CU and the gNB-DU are physically separated from each other, and thus, there is a possibility that a delivery delay will occur between the gNB-CU and the gNB-DU. Toeda [0011] taught to provide a radio base station capable of delivering an accurate reference time to a user equipment in HLS.)
While Toeda taught the above, Toeda did not explicitly teach “sending, by the DU, capability information of the DU to the CU, wherein the capability information indicates that the DU supports reporting of the unidirectional transmission delay; and receiving, by the CU, the capability information from the DU.”
With respect to claim 6, Ericsson taught:
capability information indicates support for reporting of the unidirectional transmission delay (Ericsson section 2.2 taught to introduce signaling support for a UE to compensate propagation delay. At the bare minimum, it could be a one-bit indication to indicate that UE has to compensate the received reference timing information before passing up to the application).
The Examiner finds that it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the propagation delay compensation described in Ericsson is used to determine the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Implementing this modification in Toeda, which uses a gNB with split CU/DU, would result in the capability information being sent from the DU to the CU such that the CU can implement the propagation delay compensation with the reference time. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 2 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 7, Toeda taught:
wherein sending, by the DU, the second information to the CU comprises: receiving, by the DU, first request information from the CU, wherein the first request information is used to request the second information, and the first request information comprises an identifier of the terminal device; and sending, by the DU, the second information to the CU (Toeda taught [0076] that the gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 based on a request from the gNB-CU 210, a predetermined timing, or the like (S11). In the present embodiment, a reference SFN XXX is transmitted as referenceSFN, and a reference time aaaa is transmitted as Time. [0077] The gNB-CU 210 includes the reference SFN transmitted from the gNB-DU 230 in referenceSFN of an information element TimeReferenceinfoList in system information, and includes the reference time transmitted from the gNB-DU 230 in Time of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList (S13). Toeda [0078] taught a reference time aaaa is included in Time of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList. [0106] The gNB-CU 210 notifies the gNB-DU 230 of a request signal for requesting rewrite of TimeReferenceinfoList, an encoded RRC message addressed to the UE 100, and predetermined information for the gNB-DU 230 to perform communication with the UE 100 (S41). A reference SFN is included in referenceSFN of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList in the RRC message, and a reference time in the gNB-CU 210 associated with the reference SFN is included in Time of the information element TimeReferenceinfoList. [0109] The gNB-DU 230 encodes the RRC message based on the predetermined information, and transmits the RRC message including the updated reference SFN and reference time to the UE 100 (S45). The Examiner finds that the request to updates the UE identifies the UE.).
Toeda taught the limitations of claim 7 above but did not explicitly teach requesting and sending “the third information” or “determining that reporting of the unidirectional transmission delay is supported” as claimed.
With respect to claim 7, Ericsson taught:
determining reference time based on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device and providing the reference time using an identifier of the terminal device (Ericsson section 2.1 taught to use LTE rel-15 SIB/RRC unicast based methods for reference time delivery. Ericsson section 2.2 is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” Ericsson, section 22.2 taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation… the possibility of using the legacy Timing Advance MAC CE as the method for improving the reference time information (i.e. UE increases the reference time by ½ TA. The Examiner finds that ½ of TA reads on a unidirectional transmission delay at the terminal device since the TA is used to account for propagation delay at the UE). The Examiner finds that an identifier of the terminal device/UE is used in providing the reference time since it is transmitted by RRC unicast);
and determining that reporting of the unidirectional transmission delay is supported (Ericsson section 2.2 taught to introduce signaling support for a UE to compensate propagation delay. At the bare minimum, it could be a one-bit indication to indicate that UE has to compensate the received reference timing information before passing up to the application)
The Examiner finds that it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that propagation delay compensation is used to determine the reference time and signaling is used to indicate support for this. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Implementing this modification would result in the TA being requested by the CU as in Toeda and the information being sent from the DU to the CU along with the reference time and an identifier of the terminal to be used for RRC unicast. Furthermore, implementing this modification in Toeda, which uses a gNB with split CU/DU, would result in the capability information being sent from the DU to the CU such that the CU can implement the propagation delay compensation with the reference time. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Claim 8
With respect to claim 8, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 1 (see rejection above).
Toeda did not explicitly teach the “third information” as recited in claim 8.
With respect to claim 8, Ericsson taught:
the third information comprises at least one of: a first time length, wherein the first time length represents a round trip transmission delay between the DU and the terminal device, the first time length is obtained by measuring a first uplink signal or a second uplink signal sent by the terminal device, the first uplink signal is a random access preamble, and the second uplink signal is different from the first uplink signal; a second time length, wherein the second time length is half of the first time length; a timing advance (TA) value of the terminal device; half of the TA value; or an adjustment amount corresponding to the TA value, wherein a time precision of the first time length or the second time length is higher than a time precision of the TA value (Ericsson section 2.1 taught to use LTE rel-15 SIB/RRC unicast based methods for reference time delivery. Ericsson section 2.2 is titled “the need for delay compensation at the UE.” Ericsson, section 22.2 taught that LTE rel-15 methods for reference time delivery from the RAN to UEs is not sufficient for cases of NR large cell operation that allow up to 1us of reference time inaccuracy. In particular, it is mentioned that only if a UE was to apply propagation delay compensation, a gNB-to-UE synchronization accuracy of 470ns to 540ns… It is a common understanding that the legacy timing advance MAC CE can be used for determining downlink delay compensation… the possibility of using the legacy Timing Advance MAC CE as the method for improving the reference time information (i.e. UE increases the reference time by ½ TA).
The Examiner finds that it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the synchronization techniques of Toeda such that the ½ Timing Advance described in Ericsson (reading on a second time length) is used to determine the reference time, which achieves the claimed invention. The motivation to make this modification is to maintain synchronization accuracy since propagation delay compensation needs to be applied to do so, as discussed in section 2.2 of Ericsson. Such modifications were within ordinary skill in the art and could be made with reasonable expectation of success since Toeda and Ericsson both describe reference time provisioning under 3GPP standards.
Claim 9
With respect to claim 9, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 1 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 9, Toeda taught:
wherein determining, by the CU, the first reference time comprises: receiving, by the CU, fourth information from a DU, wherein the fourth information indicates the first reference time (Toeda [0089] The gNB-CU 210 transmits a request signal to the gNB-DU 230 in order to request information related to a reference time from the gNB-DU 230 (S21). The gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 according to reception of the request signal (S23). In the present embodiment, a reference SFN XXX is transmitted as referenceSFN, and a reference time aaaa is transmitted as Time. The Examiner finds that Toeda taught receiving (i.e., received via transmission S23), by the CU, fourth information (i.e., reference SFN and reference time transmitted at S23) from a DU, wherein the fourth information indicates the first reference time (i.e., there reference time in transmission S23)).
Claim 10
With respect to claim 10, Toeda in view of Ericsson and Navstar taught: The method according to claim 9 (see rejection above).
With respect to claim 10, Toeda taught:
wherein receiving, by the CU, the fourth information from the DU comprises: sending, by the CU, second request information to the DU, wherein the second request information is used to request the first reference time, and the second request information comprises an identifier of the terminal device (Toeda [0089] taught that the gNB-CU 210 transmits a request signal to the gNB-DU 230 in order to request information related to a reference time from the gNB-DU 230 (S21). The gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 according to reception of the request signal (S23). In the present embodiment, a reference SFN XXX is transmitted as referenceSFN, and a reference time aaaa is transmitted as Time. Toeda [0100] taught Cyphering Algorithm and KEY (Security Key) are information used to encode the RRC message and uniquely decided between the UE 100 and the gNB-CU 210. Therefore, in order for the UE 100 to succeed in decoding the RRC message, the gNB-DU 230 needs to encode the RRC message using Cyphering Algorithm and KEY (Security Key) uniquely decided between the UE 100 and the gNB-CU 210. Therefore, the gNB-CU 210 needs to notify the gNB-DU 230 of at least Cyphering Algorithm and KEY (Security Key). The Examiner finds that Toeda taught sending (i.e., request signal at S21), by the CU, second request information (i.e., i.e., the request signal) to the DU, wherein the second request information is used to request the first reference time (i.e., requesting the reference time transmitted at S23), and the second request information comprises an identifier of the terminal device (i.e., the security key unique to the UE));
and receiving, by the CU, the fourth information sent by the DU (Toeda [0089] taught that the gNB-CU 210 transmits a request signal to the gNB-DU 230 in order to request information related to a reference time from the gNB-DU 230 (S21). The gNB-DU 230 transmits a reference SFN and a reference time in the gNB-DU 230 associated with the reference SFN to the gNB-CU 210 according to reception of the request signal (S23).).
Claim 11
Claim 11 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 13
Claim 13 recites limitations similar to claim 4 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 14
Claim 11 recites limitations similar to claim 6 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 15
Claim 15 recites limitations similar to claim 8 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 16
Claim 16 recites limitations similar to claim 2 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 17
Claim 17 recites limitations similar to claim 4 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 18
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claim 6 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 19
Claim 19 recites limitations similar to claim 7 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 20
Claim 20 recites limitations similar to claim 8 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 21
Claim 21 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 22
Claim 22 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed Oct 31, 2025, with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Toeda, Ericsson, and newly cited Navstar.
CONCLUSION
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher Davis whose telephone number is 703-756-1832. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 11AM to 7PM ET. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayaz Sheikh, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats see MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/C.R.D./
Examiner, Art Unit 2476
/AYAZ R SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2476