DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment submitted on 08/08/2025 has been received and considered by the examiner. Claims 1, 6, 8, 12, and 15 were amended, and Claims 2-5, 7, 9-11, 13, 16-18, 32, and 33 were cancelled. All uncancelled claims remain pending. The specification was also amended.
Because of the amendments to Claims 1, 8, and 15, and the cancellation of Claim 32, the objections corresponding to these claims are withdrawn.
Similarly, the objections to the specification are withdrawn because of the corresponding amendments thereto.
The priority document submitted on 07/07/2025 has been received, and priority is acknowledged.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 6, 8, 12, and 14-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Määttanen et al. (US 20210274414 A1, hereinafter “Määttanen”).
As to Claim 15:
Määttanen teaches:
A wireless device comprising: a transceiver; a memory; and at least one processor operatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory, and adapted to perform operations
(“[P]rocessing circuitry 170 [in Fig. 4] may execute instructions stored in device readable medium 180 or in memory within processing circuitry 170.... [P]rocessing circuitry 170 may include one or more of radio frequency (RF) transceiver circuitry 172” (Määttanen, 0138, 0139).
Here, “device” maps to “a wireless device”,
“radio frequency (RF) transceiver circuitry 172” maps to “a transceiver”,
“device readable medium 180” maps to “a memory”,
“processing circuitry 170” maps to “at least one processor”,
“include” maps to “operatively coupled”,
“radio frequency (RF) transceiver circuitry 172” maps to “the transceiver”, and
“may execute” maps to “adapted to perform operations”).
Establishing a connection with a radio access network node
(Figure 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link between a satellite and a terminal.
Here, the communication link between the “5G RAN” at a “satellite/HAPS” and a terminal via “NR via frequency f1” maps to “establishing a connection with a radio access network node”).
Receiving a radio link failure configuration related to the radio link failure detection
(“[T]he indication further indicates that the wireless device is to adjust one or more parameters or assumptions associated with Radio Link Failure (RLF) during the change from the first ground station to the second ground station” (Määttanen, 0078).
Here, “the indication ... to adjust one or more parameters or assumptions associated with Radio Link Failure (RLF)” maps to “receiving ... a radio link failure configuration related to the radio link failure detection”).
The radio link failure detection procedure includes i) counting a number of consecutive out-of-sync indications and ii) starting the timer for the radio link failure detection based on that the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications reaches the maximum number
(“[T]he RLF related parameters may include one or more of the following: N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” (Määttanen, 0114).
Here, “N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start a timer” maps to “the radio link failure detection procedure includes i) counting a number of consecutive out-of-sync indications”,
“start an RLF timer” maps to “ii) starting the timer for the radio link failure detection”,
“needed” maps to “based on”, and
“N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start a timer” maps to “the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications reaches the maximum number”).
Receiving, from the radio access network node, information related to a feeder link switching between a non-terrestrial networks gateway and the radio access network node
(“The method includes receiving, from a network, an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” (Määttanen, 0048). Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link.
Here, “receiving” maps to “receiving”,
“from a network” maps to “from the radio access network”,
“an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” maps to “information related to a feeder link switching”,
the “Gateway” in Fig. 2 maps to “a non-terrestrial networks gateway”, and
the “satellite/HAPS” that forms part of the “5G RAN” maps to “the radio access node”).
The information related to the feeder link switching informs that a feeder link related to the radio access network node will be changed from a first feeder link between the radio access network node and a first non-terrestrial networks gateway to a second feeder link between the radio access network node and a second non-terrestrial networks gateway
(“The method includes receiving, from a network, an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” (Määttanen, 0048). Fig. 1 in Määttanen shows an example satellite network, and Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link.
Here, “an indication ... to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” maps to “the information related to the feeder link switching”,
the “Feeder link” in Fig. 1 maps to “the feeder link”,
the “NR via frequency f1” connecting to the “5G RAN” satellite in Fig. 2 maps to “a feeder link related to the radio access node”,
the “satellite/HAPS” that forms part of the “5G RAN” maps to “the radio access node”,
“change” maps to “will be changed”,
“a first ground station” maps to “a first non-terrestrial networks gateway”, and
“a second ground station” maps to “a second non-terrestrial networks gateway”).
Stopping the initiated radio link failure detection procedure by i) pausing counting the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications and ii) pausing the timer for the radio link failure detection upon receiving the information related to the feeder link switching
(“[T]he wireless device may be configured to behave in a particular way during the RAN switch.... In some embodiments, the RLF related parameters may include one or more of the following: N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer ... An indication to stop the wireless device from monitoring for RLF for a period of time. An indication to stop an RLF timer if running. In this manner, the wireless device may be prevented from inappropriately declaring an RLF during a switch of gateways” (Määttanen, 0114, 0118).
Here, “stop the wireless device from monitoring for RLF” which includes “N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” maps to “stopping the initiated radio link failure detection procedure by i) pausing counting the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications”, and
“an indication to stop an RLF timer if running” which applies “during the RAN switch” maps to “pausing the timer for the radio link failure detection upon receiving the information related to the feeder link switching”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Määttanen in view of Bae et al. (US 20220279391 A1, hereinafter “Bae”).
As to Claim 1:
Määttanen describes a method for a wireless device to switch between ground stations in a satellite network.
Specifically, Määttanen teaches:
Establishing, by a wireless device, a connection with a radio access network node
(Figure 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link between a satellite and a terminal.
Here, the communication link between the “5G RAN” at a “satellite/HAPS” and a terminal via “NR via frequency f1” maps to “establishing, by a wireless device, a connection with a radio access network node”).
Receiving, by the wireless device, a radio link failure configuration related to the radio link failure detection
(“[T]he indication further indicates that the wireless device is to adjust one or more parameters or assumptions associated with Radio Link Failure (RLF) during the change from the first ground station to the second ground station” (Määttanen, 0078).
Here, “the indication ... to adjust one or more parameters or assumptions associated with Radio Link Failure (RLF)” maps to “receiving ... a radio link failure configuration related to the radio link failure detection”, and
“the wireless device” maps to “the wireless device”).
The radio link failure configuration includes information on i) information related to a timer for the radio link failure detection, and/or ii) a maximum number of consecutive out-of-sync indications for starting the RLF timer
(“[T]he RLF related parameters may include one or more of the following: N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” (Määttanen, 0114).
Here, “the RLF related parameters” map to “the radio link failure configuration”,
“may include” maps to “includes information on”,
“an RLF timer” maps to “a timer for the radio link failure detection”, and
“N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” maps to “ii) a maximum number of consecutive out-of-sync indications for starting the RLF timer”).
The radio link failure detection procedure includes i) counting a number of consecutive out-of-sync indications and ii) starting the timer for the radio link failure detection based on that the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications reaches the maximum number
(“[T]he RLF related parameters may include one or more of the following: N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” (Määttanen, 0114).
Here, “N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start a timer” maps to “the radio link failure detection procedure includes i) counting a number of consecutive out-of-sync indications”,
“start an RLF timer” maps to “ii) starting the timer for the radio link failure detection”,
“needed” maps to “based on”, and
“N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start a timer” maps to “the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications reaches the maximum number”).
Receiving, by the wireless device from the radio access network node, information related to a feeder link switching between a non-terrestrial networks gateway and the radio access network node
(“The method includes receiving, from a network, an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” (Määttanen, 0048). Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link.
Here, “receiving” maps to “receiving”,
“the wireless device” maps to “by the wireless device”,
“from a network” maps to “from the radio access network”,
“an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” maps to “information related to a feeder link switching”,
the “Gateway” in Fig. 2 maps to “a non-terrestrial networks gateway”, and
the “satellite/HAPS” that forms part of the “5G RAN” maps to “the radio access node”).
The information related to the feeder link switching informs that a feeder link related to the radio access network node will be changed from a first feeder link between the radio access network node and a first non-terrestrial networks gateway to a second feeder link between the radio access network node and a second non-terrestrial networks gateway
(“The method includes receiving, from a network, an indication for the wireless device to prepare to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” (Määttanen, 0048). Fig. 1 in Määttanen shows an example satellite network, and Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows an example feeder link.
Here, “an indication ... to change from a first ground station to a second ground station” maps to “the information related to the feeder link switching”,
the “Feeder link” in Fig. 1 maps to “the feeder link”,
the “NR via frequency f1” connecting to the “5G RAN” satellite in Fig. 2 maps to “a feeder link related to the radio access node”,
the “satellite/HAPS” that forms part of the “5G RAN” maps to “the radio access node”,
“change” maps to “will be changed”,
“a first ground station” maps to “a first non-terrestrial networks gateway”, and
“a second ground station” maps to “a second non-terrestrial networks gateway”).
Stopping, by the wireless device, the initiated radio link failure detection procedure by i) pausing counting the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications and ii) pausing the timer for the radio link failure detection upon receiving the information related to the feeder link switching
(“[T]he wireless device may be configured to behave in a particular way during the RAN switch.... In some embodiments, the RLF related parameters may include one or more of the following: N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer ... An indication to stop the wireless device from monitoring for RLF for a period of time. An indication to stop an RLF timer if running. In this manner, the wireless device may be prevented from inappropriately declaring an RLF during a switch of gateways” (Määttanen, 0114, 0118).
Here, “the wireless device” maps to “the wireless device”,
“stop the wireless device from monitoring for RLF” which includes “N number of out-of-sync indications needed to start an RLF timer” maps to “stopping ... the initiated radio link failure detection procedure by i) pausing counting the number of consecutive out-of-sync indications”, and
“an indication to stop an RLF timer if running” which applies “during the RAN switch” maps to “pausing the timer for the radio link failure detection upon receiving the information related to the feeder link switching”).
Määttanen does not explicitly disclose:
Initiating, by the wireless device, a radio link failure detection procedure for the connection
However, Bae does disclose a method for conditionally handing over a user device between base stations.
Specifically, Bae teaches:
Initiating, by the wireless device, a radio link failure detection procedure for the connection
(“[T]he DU [distributed unit of the base station] ... enables and operates a Radio Link Failure (RLF) detection function of the terminal 120” (Bae, 0101).
Here, “enables” maps to “initiating”,
“the terminal 120” maps to “the wireless device”,
“a Radio Link Failure (RLF) detection function” maps to “a Radio Link Failure (RLF) detection for the connection”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Bae’s practice of initiating RLF monitoring for a specific connection into Määttanen’s method for managing RLF monitoring while switching feeder links. A RLF monitoring procedure already exists in Määttanen, so it would be obvious to initiate it at some point.
As to Claim 12:
Määttanen teaches:
The radio access network node includes a satellite
(Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows examples of feeder links in a satellite network.
Here, the “satellite/HAPS” associated with a “5G RAN” maps to “the radio access network node includes a satellite”).
As to Claim 14:
From the list of:
The wireless device is in communication with at least one of a user equipment, a network, or an autonomous vehicle other than the wireless device
Määttanen at least teaches:
The wireless device is in communication with ... a network
(Fig. 2 in Määttanen shows examples of feeder links in a satellite network.
Here, communications between the terminal and the “5G CN [core network]” in Fig. 2 maps to “the wireless device is in communication with ... a network”).
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Määttanen in view of Bae and further in view of Yiu et al. (US 20220046487 A1, hereinafter “Yiu”).
As to Claim 6:
Määttanen does not explicitly disclose:
Indications received, by an upper layer of the wireless device, from a lower layer of the wireless device
However, Bae does teach:
Indications received, by an upper layer of the wireless device, from a lower layer of the wireless device
([T]he CU-CP unit 522 may support RRC/PDCP layers (e.g., for RRC), and the CU-UP unit 524a or 524b may support a PDCP layer (e.g., for user data transmission). The CU-CP unit 522 and the CU-UP unit 524a or 524b may be coupled through an interface” (Bae, 0089).
Here, “data” maps to “indications”,
“transmission” maps to “received” from the perspective of the receiving device,
“a RRC ... layers” maps to “an upper layer of the wireless device”, and
“PDCP layer” maps to “a lower layer of the wireless device”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Bae’s practice of initiating RLF monitoring for a specific connection into Määttanen’s method for managing RLF monitoring while switching feeder links. A RLF monitoring procedure already exists in Määttanen, so it would be obvious to initiate it at some point.
The combination of Määttanen and Bae does not explicitly disclose:
The out-of-sync indications are received from a lower layer of the wireless device
However, Yiu does describe methods to handle radio link failure during multi-connectivity handover.
Specifically, Yiu teaches:
The out-of-sync indications are received from a lower layer of the wireless device
(“[T]he UE receives an out-of-sync signal from the physical layer” (Yiu, 0039).
Here, “out-of-sync signal” maps to “the out of sync indications”,
“receives” maps to “are receives”,
“the physical layer” maps to “a lower layer”, and
“the UE” maps to “the wireless device”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the out of sync signals disclosed in Yiu are received at the lower layer of the user device before being sent to a higher layer, as taught in Bae. This is consistent with the normal operation of a network protocol stack.
As to Claim 8:
The combination of Määttanen and Bae does not explicitly disclose:
The RLF detection includes declaring the RLF timer upon expiry of the RLF timer
However, Yiu does teach:
The RLF detection includes declaring the RLF timer upon expiry of the RLF timer
(“When the RLF timer expires, the UE declares a radio link failure” (Yiu, 0039).
Here, “declares a radio link failure” maps to “the RLF detection includes declaring the RLF timer”, and
“when the RLF timer expires” maps to “upon expiry of the RLF timer”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Yiu’s practice of using a timer into Määttanen’s method for detecting RLF. The timer can help measure how long a UE has gone without communicating with an uplink device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin Peter Welte whose telephone number is (703)756-5965. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, EST.
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, Chirag Shah, can be reached at (571) 272-3144. 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.
/B.P.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2477
/CHIRAG G SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477