Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR 10-2020-0137255, filed on 10/22/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/08/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 15, 16, 18-24, and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Da SIlva et al. (2023/0107443), hereinafter Da Silva in view of Dong et al. (2023/0089127), hereinafter Dong.
Re. Claim 15 and 23, Da Silva teaches a terminal in a non-terrestrial network (NTN), the terminal comprising: a transceiver (¶0132 - [T]he communication circuit 130; 230 may include any of the following: a receiver, a transmitter, a transceiver, input/output (I/O) circuitry, input port(s) and/or output port(s)); and a controller coupled with the transceiver (¶0115 - “[N]etwork node” may refer to base stations, access points, network control nodes such as network controllers), the controller is configured to: perform a method comprising: performing measurements of a cell selection reception level value (Srxlev) (¶0317 - s-NonIntraSearchP is the threshold Srxlev value for serving cell, determines whether UE should search for new cell or not) and a cell selection quality value (Squal) for a serving cell (¶0318 - s-NonIntraSearchQ is the threshold Squal value for serving cell, determines whether UE should search for new cell or not); identifying that the serving cell fulfils the Srxlev greater than a first threshold value (¶0256-0257 - If the network is using single carrier frequency, intra frequency reselection shall be performed under the conditions below… Srxlev>SIntraSearchP, neighbouring measurement RSRP does not fall below the threshold) and the Squal greater than a second threshold value (¶0256, ¶0258 - If the network is using single carrier frequency, intra frequency reselection shall be performed under the conditions below… Squal>SIntraSearchQ, neighbouring measurement RSRQ does not fall below the threshold); receiving, a distance threshold value included in a System Information Block (SIB) (¶0147 - In NR the threshold parameters are available in the different SIBs), wherein the SIB is associated with satellite assistance information (¶0154 - SIB2 contains cell re-selection information that is common for intra-frequency, inter-frequency and/or inter-RAT cell re-selection); determining to perform measurements of at least one neighbor cell, wherein in case that the at least one neighbor cell is a NR inter-frequency cell, the NR inter-frequency cell has an equal or lower priority than a priority of the serving cell (¶0154 - The particular system information block referred to as SIB2 contains cell re-selection information that is common for intra-frequency, inter-frequency and/or inter-RAT cell re-selection. & ¶0278-0280 - Consider now instead a reselection to lower priority. The reselection to lower priority NR frequency than the serving cell is performed when under the following conditions: The UE must have been camped on the serving cell for at least 1 second. The new cell fulfills Squal> ThreshXLowQ condition during the time interval t-ReselectionNR when threshServingLowQ is already broadcast in SIB2 and Squal<ThreshServingLowQ); and wherein in case that the at least one neighbor cell is an inter-RAT frequency cell, the inter-RAT frequency cell has a lower priority than the priority of the serving cell (¶0154 - The particular system information block referred to as SIB2 contains cell re-selection information that is common for intra-frequency, inter-frequency and/or inter-RAT cell re-selection, ¶0165 - threshServingLowQ is the Squal threshold used by the UE on the serving cell when reselecting towards a lower priority RAT/frequency, & ¶0278-0280 - Consider now instead a reselection to lower priority. The reselection to lower priority NR frequency than the serving cell is performed when under the following conditions: The UE must have been camped on the serving cell for at least 1 second. The new cell fulfills Squal>ThreshXLowQ condition during the time interval t-ReselectionNR when threshServingLowQ is already broadcast in SIB2 and Squal<ThreshServing, LowQ).
Yet, De Silva does not expressly teach identifying a distance between the terminal and a reference location of the serving cell, in case that the serving cell fulfils the Srxlev greater than the first threshold value and the Squal greater than the second threshold value, performing measurement of at least one neighbor cell based on the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell and the distance threshold value; and performing a cell reselection based on the measurements of at least one neighbor cell.
However, Dong explicitly teaches identifying a distance between the terminal and a reference location of the serving cell (¶0034 - When the terminal performs cell reselection, it performs the cell reselection based on the reference distance of the cell and the actual distance between the terminal and the center of the cell), in the case that the serving cell fulfils the Srxlev greater than the first threshold value and the Squal greater than the second threshold value (¶0030 – for intra-frequency measurements of the terminal, if the serving cell satisfies Srxlev>SIntraSearchP and Squal>SIntraSearchQ, the terminal may select not to perform measurements on intra-frequency neighboring cells. Examiner interprets that the use of the word may indicates the existence of a choice to perform or not to perform and does not exclude performing the subsequently performed claim. ¶0054 - after the cell reselection is performed based on the existing S-criteria and R-criteria, Dref and Dmeasure are combined to perform the cell reselection) and the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is greater than the distance threshold value (¶0079 in response to the reference distance threshold of the serving cell being less than the actual distance between the terminal and the center of the serving cell, selecting a neighboring cell with a largest R value among the neighboring cells with the R values higher than the R value of the serving cell as the reselected cell.); and performing a cell reselection based on the measurements of at least one neighbor cell wherein the measurements of at least one neighbor cell are not performed in case that the distance threshold value is not transmitted to the terminal (¶0006 – [P]erform cell reselection based on the reference distance threshold and an actual distance between the terminal and a center of the cell. Examiner interprets).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Dong to the teaching of De Silva. The motivation for such would be as Dong provides the concept of a reference distance between the terminal and the cell that, when used with a threshold value, can indicate whether reselection should be performed (Dong ¶0034). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 16 and 24, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 15 and 23.
Yet, De Silva does not expressly teach wherein the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is greater than the distance threshold value.
However, Dong explicitly teaches wherein the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is greater than the distance threshold value (¶0079 – [T]he processing unit 102 is configured to perform the cell reselection based on the… actual distance between the terminal and the center of the serving cell… in response to the reference distance threshold of the serving cell being less than the actual distance between the terminal and the center of the serving cell, [the processing unit] select[s] a neighboring cell).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Dong to the teaching of De Silva. The motivation for such would be as Dong provides that reselection occurs when the distance between the terminal and the current cell exceeds a set value (Dong ¶0079). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 18 and 26, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 15 and 23.
Yet, De Silva does not expressly teach wherein in case that the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is less than the distance threshold value, the measurements of at least one neighbor cell is not performed.
However, Dong explicitly teaches wherein in case that the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is less than the distance threshold value, the measurements of at least one neighbor cell is not performed (¶0048 - Dref is used to represent the reference distance threshold of the cell and Dmeasure is used to represent the actual distance between the terminal and the center of the cell. ¶0049 – [I]n response to the service cell of the terminal satisfying… Dref>Dmeasure, the terminal may select not to measure intra-frequency neighboring cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Dong to the teaching of De Silva. The motivation for such would be as Dong provides that a measurement is not performed when the distance between the terminal and the cell is below the threshold value (Dong ¶0048-0049). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re Claims 19 and 27, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 15 and 23.
De Silva further teaches wherein the SIB is broadcast from the serving cell (¶0067 - According to this transmission mode the broadcasted message may be provided by means of a system information block).
Yet, De Silva does not expressly teach wherein the SIB includes ephemeris information.
However, Dong explicitly teaches wherein the SIB includes ephemeris information (¶0071 - The terminal… obtains the ephemeris information (cell location information) from the system broadcast messages).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Dong to the teaching of De Silva. The motivation for such would be as Dong provides that the SIB received by the terminal contains ephemeris information (Dong ¶0071). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claim 20, De Silva and Dong teach Claim 15.
De Silva further teaches wherein performing the measurements of at least one neighbor cell comprises: performing an intra-frequency measurement (¶0322 - The UE performs intra-frequency measurement… of the serving cell).
Re. Claims 28, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 23.
De Silva further teaches wherein performing the measurements of at least one neighbor cell comprises at least one of: intra-frequency measurements (¶0196 - SIB3 in turn contains cell re-selection information common for intra-frequency, inter-frequency and/or inter-RAT cell re-selection, i.e. applicable for more than one type of cell re-selection but not necessarily all, as well as intra-frequency cell re-selection information other than neighbouring cell related )
Re. Claims 22 and 29, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 15 and 23.
De Silva further teaches where the Srxlev is lower than a first threshold value OR the Squal is lower than a second threshold value, performing measurements of the at least one neighbor cell. (¶0321 - s-IntraSearchP indicates an Rx level threshold, the UE performs intra-frequency measurement only when SrxLev of the serving cell<=SintraSearch. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”).
Claims 17 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva and Dong in view of Wang et al. (2021/0321322), hereinafter Wang.
Re. Claims 17 and 25, De Silva and Dong teach Claims 15 and 23.
Yet, neither De Silva nor Dong explicitly teach wherein the measurements of at least one neighbor cell is not performed in at least one of following cases: the distance threshold value is not transmitted to the terminal; the terminal does not support a location measurement for the terminal; or a location information of the terminal is not obtained.
However, Wang expressly teaches wherein the measurements of at least one neighbor cell is not performed in at least one of the following cases: the terminal does not support a location measurement for the terminal; OR a location information of the terminal is not obtained (¶0033 - In response to the acquirement failure of the SIB of the LTE cell, the UE will start a barring timer which prevents the UE from connecting the LTE cell for a waiting period. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Wang to the teaching of De Silva and Dong. The motivation for such would be as Wang provides that the terminal does not need to perform any measurements in the event that it does not receive location information from the cell, rather it can start a timer and wait for the cell to respond (Wang ¶0033). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 15 and 23 filed on 01/28/2026 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the rejection of Claims 15 and 23 should be withdrawn as Da Silva, with regard to the new amendment to the independent claims, does not adequately disclose “determining to perform measurements of at least one neighbor cell, wherein in case that the at least one neighbor cell is a NR inter-frequency cell, the NR inter-frequency cell has an equal or lower priority than a priority of the serving cell, and wherein in case that the at least one neighbor cell is an inter-RAT frequency cell, the inter-RAT frequency cell has a lower priority than the priority of the serving cell”. In their argument, Applicant refers to previously cited ¶0267-0269 of De Silva which they argue only applies when the Srxlev and Squal values are less than a threshold. Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument and directs Applicant to ¶0154 (The particular system information block referred to as SIB2 contains cell re-selection information that is common for intra-frequency, inter-frequency and/or inter-RAT cell re-selection), ¶0165 (threshServingLowQ is the Squal threshold used by the UE on the serving cell when reselecting towards a lower priority RAT/frequency) & ¶0278-0280 (Consider now instead a reselection to lower priority. The reselection to lower priority NR frequency than the serving cell is performed when under the following conditions: The UE must have been camped on the serving cell for at least 1 second. The new cell fulfills Squal>ThreshXLowQ condition during the time interval t-ReselectionNR when threshServingLowQ is already broadcast in SIB2 and Squal<ThreshServingLowQ). In the amended language, Applicant is seeking to claim a selection to “lower priority” cells than that of the current serving cell, of which De Silva provides context for selecting lower priority when the new cell has Squal greater than a provided threshold condition. As such, Examiner finds that this new mapping of De Silva adequately discloses the newly amended material to the independent claims. Additionally, the limitation “determining to perform measurements of at least one neighborhood cell” has now been rejected under De Silva in light of the change of grounds provided to the limitation by the amendment for the sake of clarity.
Regarding Dong, Applicant argues that the previously provided rejection does not disclose where the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is greater than a threshold. Examiner has amended his rejection to include ¶0079 of Dong (in response to the reference distance threshold of the serving cell being less than the actual distance between the terminal and the center of the serving cell, selecting a neighboring cell with a largest R value among the neighboring cells with the R values higher than the R value of the serving cell as the reselected cell) which he believes satisfies the Claim language of “the distance between the terminal and the reference location of the serving cell is greater than the distance threshold value”. Examiner does not propose the action of “selecting” to be analogous to the claimed “determining to perform measurements” as that limitation is rejected under De Silva, the above stated paragraph is put forward to show that Dong discloses performing an action regarding cell selection when the distance is greater than a threshold. As such, with regards to the arguments put forth against both De Silva and Dong, Examiner upholds the previously provided rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the remaining dependent claims filed on 01/28/2026 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the rejection for the claims depending on Claims 15 and 23 should be withdrawn on account of Claims 15 and 23 overcoming their rejection. Examiner respectfully disagrees with this due to the above stated maintaining of Claim 15 and 23’s rejection. As such, the rejections on the dependent claims are maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zheng et al. (2023/0362765) – Fig. 9, ¶0086-0101;
Du et al. (CN 112584451 A) – Fig. 4, ¶0006-0008, ¶0070-0070.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475