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 .
Applicant’s amendment filed 3/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1 and 11 are amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendments
Amendments filed on 3/26/2026 are entered for prosecution. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 11 (pages 8-10) in a reply filed 3/26/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
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 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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 6, 8-10, 11, 12, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shrestha et al. (US 2022/0144670, hereinafter Shrestha4670) in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2022/0030504 A1, hereinafter Shrestha0504).
It is noted that the corresponding citation from Shrestha4670 to the rejection of the claims is supported by Provisional Application US 63/061,711 to which Shrestha4670 claims the priority, and which has been filed on Aug. 5, 2020. Thus, Shrestha4670 was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. It is also noted that the corresponding citation from Shrestha0504 to the rejection of the claims is supported by Provisional Application US 63/056,491 to which Shrestha0504 claims the priority, and which has been filed on Jul. 24, 2020. Thus, Shrestha0504 was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1:
Shrestha4670 teaches a method performed by a network node (e.g., RAN) comprising a non-geostationary satellite with earth-moving beams (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 6, Space Vehicle (SV) 102, 202, 302], support is found in Fig. 6 of 63/061,711.), the method comprising:
mapping a first cell identifier (e.g., CGI of a cell) associated with the network node (i.e., geographic coverage area provided by the non-terrestrial vehicles and identified by a cell ID (e.g., PCI, CGI) labeled “Cell ID 1”. See, Shrestha4670: Fig. 9 and para. [0114], “The geographic coverage areas 910 illustrate the cellular coverage provided by the non-terrestrial vehicles 904. The geographic coverage area 910-1 is identified by a cell ID (e.g., PCI, CGI) labeled “Cell ID 1” and the geographic coverage area 910-2 is identified by a cell ID labeled “Cell ID 2.””, supports are found in Fig. 9 and Para. [00109] of 63/061,711.) to a second cell identifier (e.g., an enhanced CGI associated with a location of the UE) associated with a first geographical coverage location of a beam (e.g., tracking area) transmitted by the non-geostationary satellite (See, Shrestha4670: para. [0119], “the present disclosure provides techniques to augment the CGI so that it more accurately represents the geographic area in which a UE is located. Such a CGI may be referred to herein as an “augmented” or “enhanced” CGI.”; para. [0120], “Since the cell associated with the cell identity in the CGI may be moving or changing, the timestamp is added to indicate the last known time the UE accessed the identified cell. The core network can use a mapping function and/or database to convert the enhanced CGI (i.e., CGI-plus-timestamp) to an approximate geographic location for the UE when needed (e.g., for routing an emergency call). More specifically, the mapping could indicate the geographic area of the radio coverage of the cell (e.g., geographic coverage area 810) at the time indicated by the timestamp.”; para. [0122], “the RAN may perform the mapping, either upon request from the core network or by configuration.”, supports are found in para. [00114] [00115] [00117] of 63/061,711.), wherein the first cell identifier and the second cell identifier both comprise the same type of identifier (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 10, Cell Global Identity (CGI); para. [0118-0120], wherein the CGI and the enhanced CGI (i.e., CGI-plus-timestamp) are the same type of cell global identifier, support is found in Fig. 10 and para. [00115-00117] of 63/061,711.), and the geographical coverage location associated with the second cell identifier moves with the beam transmitted by the non-geostationary satellite (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 9 and para. [0119], “As described with reference to FIG. 9, the UE 902 may not move, but the cell ID with which it is associated may change based on the movement of the non-terrestrial vehicles 904.”, support is found in Fig. 9 and para. [00114] of 63/061,711.).
Shrestha4670 does not explicitly teach wherein broadcasting the first cell identifier to one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location.
In the same field of endeavor, Shrestha0504 teaches wherein broadcasting the first cell identifier to one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location (see, Shrestha0504: para. [0057], “Because each cell in FIG. 4 serves two tracking areas, each cell may broadcast two different CGIs. For example, cell 1 may broadcast CGI1 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA1+cell 1) and CGI4 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA4+cell 1). Additionally, cell 2 may broadcast CGI2 (e.g., CGI2=PLMN2+TA2+cell 2) and CGI3 (e.g., CGI3=PLMN2+TA3+cell 2). The equations described above are provided for ease of explanation, the cell global identity is not limited to the sum of the PLMN ID, tracking area code, and cell ID. Rather, the cell global identity may be a function of the PLMN ID, the tracking area code, the cell ID, and/or other elements.”, support is found in para. [0053] of 63/056,491.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Shrestha4670 in combination of the teachings of Shrestha0504 in order for the UE in the tracking area to select a cell and identify a corresponding CGI based on the CGI’s broadcast from the selected cell (see, Shrestha0504: para. [0060], support is found in para. [0056] of 63/056,491.).
Shrestha4670 further teaches wherein transmitting the second cell identifier (i.e., enhanced CGI) to a core network node as part of location information for one of the one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 11; para. [0128], “At 1110, the RAN entity determines to send a location of a UE (e.g., any of the UEs described herein, such as UE 105 in FIGS. 1-3) to a network entity (e.g., AMF 122, SMF 134, etc.).”; para. [0129], “At 1120, the RAN entity reports, to the network entity, an enhanced CGI, the enhanced CGI including at least one field representing the location of the UE.”, supports are found in Fig. 11 and para. [00123-00124] of 63/061,711.).
Regarding claim 2:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha4670 further teaches wherein mapping the first cell identifier associated with the network node to the second cell identifier associated with the first geographical coverage location of the beam transmitted by the non-geostationary satellite is based on ephemeris data associated with the non-geostationary satellite and a time of day (see, Shrestha4670: para. [0087], “An sNB 106/202/307 may determine PLMN and TA support (and thus the PLMN IDs and TACs which are broadcast in a SIB for each radio cell) from known ephemeris data for each SV 102/202/302 and a known directionality and angular range for component radio beams for each radio cell (e.g., Cell 1 and Cell 2). An sNB 106/202/307 may then update SIB broadcasting.”, support is found in para. [0082] of 63/028,539.).
Regarding claim 6:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha4670 further teaches wherein receiving an indication from a core network for a mobile terminated transaction (e.g., a wireless emergency alert (WEA) message), the indication comprising the second cell identifier associated with the geographical coverage location of the beam transmitted by the non-geostationary satellite; mapping the received second cell identifier to the first cell identifier; and transmitting a mobile terminated transaction to one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location based on the first cell identifier (see, Shrestha4670: para. [0135], “a core network (e.g., a 5GCN 110) may use an enhanced CGI with a content defined according to SOLUTION 3 to represent a fixed cell area in which a wireless emergency alert (WEA) message is to be broadcast to UEs 105. For example, a government agency may provide to a 5GCN 110 a WEA message and a geographic definition of a target area in which the WEA message is to be broadcast by the PLMN associated with the 5GCN 110. The geographic definition of the target area may, for example, comprise a polygon defined by latitude and longitude coordinates for its vertices. The 5GCN 110 (e.g., a Cell Broadcast Center Function (CBCF) in 5GCN 110) may then map the target area into one or more enhanced CGIs, where the area covered by the one or more enhanced CGIs is the same as or slightly exceeds the target area. The 5GCN 110 may then provide to one or more sNBs 106/202/307 in an NG-RAN 112 the WEA message and the one or more enhanced CGIs. The NG-RAN 112 (e.g., the one or more sNBs 106/202/307 in NG-RAN 112) may then map each of the enhanced CGIs to one or more radio cells for the NG-RAN 112 and may broadcast the WEA message in these radio cells.”, support is found in para. [00124] of 63/061,711.).
Regarding claim 8:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha0504 further teaches wherein the first cell identifier comprises one of an evolved universal terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN) cell global identifier and a new radio (NR) cell global identifier (see, Shrestha2: para. [0006], “The method includes identifying multiple cell global identities (CGIs) broadcast by a cell. In the present description, when discussing CGIs, E-UTRAN (evolved universal terrestrial access network) cell global identifiers (ECGIs) and future types of identifiers are also contemplated. The method includes determining a current tracking area identity of the UE from multiple tracking area identities of the cell based on a predefined or preconfigured rule. The method further includes selecting a first CGI of the multiple of CGIs based on the determined tracking area identity.”; para. [0025], “The network 100 may be a 5G or NR network or some other wireless network, such as an LTE network.”; para. [0057], “As described, a CGI may be determined from a tracking area code. More specifically, the CGI may be determined based on a public land mobile network (PLMN) ID, the tracking area code, a physical cell identifier (PCI) and/or a cell ID. Because each cell in FIG. 4 serves two tracking areas, each cell may broadcast two different CGIs. For example, cell 1 may broadcast CGI1 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA1+cell 1) and CGI4 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA4+cell 1). Additionally, cell 2 may broadcast CGI2 (e.g., CGI2=PLMN2+TA2+cell 2) and CGI3 (e.g., CGI3=PLMN2+TA3+cell 2). The equations described above are provided for ease of explanation, the cell global identity is not limited to the sum of the PLMN ID, tracking area code, and cell ID. Rather, the cell global identity may be a function of the PLMN ID, the tracking area code, the cell ID, and/or other elements.”, wherein CGI1, CGI2, CGI3, CGI4, etc. determined based on a combination of PLMN and cell ID are equivalent to the first cell identifier of the instant application. Support is found in para. [0053] of 63/056,491.). Support is found in para. [0005] [0021] [0053] of 63/056,491.)
Regarding claim 9:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha0504 further teaches wherein the second cell identifier comprises one of an evolved universal terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN) cell global identifier and a new radio (NR) cell global identifier (see, Shrestha0504: para. [0057], “As described, a CGI may be determined from a tracking area code. More specifically, the CGI may be determined based on a public land mobile network (PLMN) ID, the tracking area code, a physical cell identifier (PCI) and/or a cell ID. Because each cell in FIG. 4 serves two tracking areas, each cell may broadcast two different CGIs. For example, cell 1 may broadcast CGI1 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA1+cell 1) and CGI4 (e.g., CGI1=PLMN1+TA4+cell 1). Additionally, cell 2 may broadcast CGI2 (e.g., CGI2=PLMN2+TA2+cell 2) and CGI3 (e.g., CGI3=PLMN2+TA3+cell 2). The equations described above are provided for ease of explanation, the cell global identity is not limited to the sum of the PLMN ID, tracking area code, and cell ID. Rather, the cell global identity may be a function of the PLMN ID, the tracking area code, the cell ID, and/or other elements.”; para. [0025], “The network 100 may be a 5G or NR network or some other wireless network, such as an LTE network.”, wherein CGI1, CGI2, CGI3, CGI4, etc. determined based on a combination of PLMN and TA are equivalent to the second cell identifier of the instant application. Support is found in para. [0021] [0053] of 63/056,491.).
Regarding claim 10:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha4670 further teaches wherein transmitting the second cell identifier to a core network node as part of location information comprises transmitting at least one of an initial uplink non-access stratum message, a context release complete message, a path switch request, and a location report (see, Shrestha4670: para. [0129], “At 1120, the RAN entity reports, to the network entity, an enhanced CGI, the enhanced CGI including at least one field representing the location of the UE.”, supports are found in Fig. 11 and para. [00124] of 63/061,711.).
Regarding claim 11:
Claim 11 is directed towards a network node comprising a non-geostationary satellite (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 7B, Non-terrestrial vehicle 704, support is found in Fig. 7B of 63/061,711.) with earth-moving beams (see, Edge: Fig. 4 and para. [0020], “SV generating multiple beams over an area that includes multiple countries.”; para. [0081], “beam coverage may move slowly within one country and then hop to a new country”, supports are found in Fig. 4 and para. [0018] [0076] of 63/061,711.), the network node comprising processing circuitry (see, Shrestha4670: Fig. 7B, Processing System 784, support is found in Fig. 7B of 63/061,711.) operable to: perform the method of claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12:
Claim 12 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 2. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 16:
Claim 16 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 6. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 18:
Claim 18 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 8. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 19:
Claim 19 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 9. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 10. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 10 above.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 further in view of Fan et al. (US 2022/0069902 A1, hereinafter Fan).
Regarding claim 7:
As discussed above, Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 does not explicitly teach wherein the network node comprises a source network node for a handover and the method further comprises transmitting a handover request to a target network node for a wireless device of the one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location, wherein the handover request includes the second cell identifier.
In the same field of endeavor, Fan teaches wherein the network node comprises a source network node (see, Fan: Fig. 3, Source satellite base station) for a handover and the method further comprises transmitting a handover request (see, Fan: Fig. 3, Step 306) to a target network node (see, Fan: Fig. 3, Candidate satellite base station) for a wireless device (see, Fan: Fig. 3, Terminal) of the one or more wireless devices in the first geographical coverage location, wherein the handover request includes the second cell identifier (see, Fan: para. [0396], “the source satellite base station sends a handover request message to the at least one candidate satellite base station; wherein the handover request message includes at least one of the latest location information reported by the terminal, the moving speed, the moving direction, and the tracking area identification information;”, wherein the latest location information reported by the terminal (e.g., enhanced CGI of Shrestha4670) is equivalent to the second cell identifier of the instant application.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Shrestha4670 in view of Shrestha0504 in combination of the teachings of Fan in order to handover the UE(s) from a source satellite base station to a candidate satellite base station based on the latest location information reported by the UE (i.e., enhanced CGI of Shrestha4670), the moving speed, the moving direction, and/or the tracking area identification information (see, Fan: para. [0396]).
Regarding claim 17:
Claim 17 is directed towards the network node of claim 11 that is further limited to similar features to claim 7. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 7 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 and 13-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI-HAE YEA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3310. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI, 7am-3pm, 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, SUJOY K KUNDU can be reached on (571) 272-8586. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JI-HAE YEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights