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 .
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.
This action is responsive to the RCE filed on 3/4/26.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The analysis under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (pre-AIA ), requires that the scope of protection sought be supported by the specification disclosure. The pertinent inquiries include determining (1) whether the subject matter defined in the claims is described in the specification and (2) whether the specification disclosure as a whole is to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling virtual good or virtual goods critical or essential to the practice of the invention, but not included in the claim(s) is not enabled by the disclosure. See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976).
The "invention" for the purpose of the first paragraph analysis is defined by the claims. The description requirement is simply that the claimed subject matter must be described in the specification. The function of the description requirement is to ensure that the applicant had possession of the invention on the filing date of the application. The application need not describe the claim limitations exactly, but must be sufficiently clear for one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the applicant's invention encompasses the recited limitations. The description requirement is not met if the application does not expressly or inherently disclose the claimed invention.
Specification does not explicitly describe nor is sufficiently clear for one of ordinary skill in art to recognize the following steps as recited in claim(s) 1, 10 & 19:
· when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list, and determining the target cell for cell selection from the updated candidate cell list, wherein when a number of cell(s) in the updated candidate cell list is 1, the target cell is obtained.
The Examiner could not locate a support for “when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list” in a Detail Description. The “When the number of cells in the (i+ 1 )-th candidate cell list is greater than 1, re-execute the above process after waiting for a predetermined period of time, or select the candidate cell with the best channel quality... [see Paragraph 83-84 of the present Specification]. It is unclear how this quoted paragraph of the present specification can be equated with the applicant’s interpretation that “when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list” and thus it is unclear how this quoted paragraph of the present specification can be equated with the claimed limitations “…when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list” in claim(s) 1, 10 & 19.
Therefore, claim(s) 1-20 is/are unclear that the one ordinarily skilled in the art cannot recognize the encompassed claimed limitations.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are unclear to the examiner; what does it mean by stating “when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list, and determining the target cell for cell selection from the updated candidate cell list, wherein when a number of cell(s) in the updated candidate cell list is 1, the target cell is obtained? The claim languages are not very clear what is it the Applicant trying to accomplished? To obtain the target cell? The target cell only able to obtain when the candidate cell list is 1? Is the cell selection for the target cell? Please clarify
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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-16, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng, U.S. Pub/Patent No. US 2022/0217602 A1 in view of Shinada, US 2016/0135106 Al.
As to claim 1, Geng teaches a cell selection method, applied to a terminal, the method comprising:
performing cell selection according to first information different from a channel quality of the cell (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves. When performing the reselection, if the terminal device measures both a target cell 1 and a target cell 2, and quality of both the target cell 1 and the target cell 2 meet the S criterion of the reselection process), where the first information comprises:
a type of a satellite (Geng, page 4, paragraph 56-58; i.e., [0056] A satellite system can be classified into the following three types based on a satellite height, that is, a satellite orbit height: [0057] (1) High-earth orbit (GEO) satellite: It is also referred to a geostationary satellite; [0058] (2) Low-earth orbit (LEO) satellite: [0059] (3) Medium-earth orbit satellite: is a satellite between a high-earth orbit satellite and low-earth orbit
satellite);
cell type of the satellite (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) 38.304 v15.4.0 protocol related to a 5G);
the performing cell selection according to first information comprises: performing cell selection according to the type of the satellite to obtain a candidate cell list (Geng, page 4, paragraph 56-58; page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0056] A satellite system can be classified into the following three types based on a satellite height, that is, a satellite orbit height, a satellite between a high-earth orbit satellite and low-earth orbit satellite; [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves);
determining a target cell for cell selection from the candidate cell list (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). For example, the terminal device is located in a serving cell. When performing the reselection, if the terminal device measures both a target cell 1 and a target cell 2, and quality of both the target cell 1 and the target cell 2 meet the S criterion of the reselection process);
determining the target cell for cell selection from the candidate cell list, wherein when a number of cell(s) in the candidate cell list is 1, the target cell is obtained (Geng, page 6, paragraph 100 & 103; page 7, paragraph 117-119; i.e., [0100] The target cell herein refers to a cell to which the terminal device is to be reselected; [0117] ranking value of a cell x in the candidate cell; w is a preset weight value or a weight value configured is a sum of cell quality of all the cells (N in total) in the candidate cell, and N is an integer greater than 1)
But Geng failed to teach the claim limitation wherein when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list.
However, Shinada teaches the limitation wherein when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list and updated cell list (Shinada, page 11, paragraph 151; page 12, paragraph 153-154; i.e., [0151] generating the microcell management table 43 and the small cell management table 44 is similar to when the number of small cells exceeds the threshold; [0153] The search unit 33 determines whether an allocated small cell exceeds a predetermined threshold with respect to an rth macrocell (Step S64)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Geng to substitute timing advance from Wang for coverage time from Geng to avoid intra-cell interference and ensure orthogonality of uplink transmission of respective terminals within a same cell (Wang, page 1, paragraph 2).
As to claim 2, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the first information further comprises location information of the terminal, and before performing cell selection according to the type of the satellite , the method further comprises, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain the candidate cell list (Geng, page 4, paragraph 56-58; page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0056] A satellite system can be classified into the following three types based on a satellite height, that is, a satellite orbit height, a satellite between a high-earth orbit satellite and low-earth orbit satellite; [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves), and wherein the location information of the terminal is determined according to at least one of following second information:
a distance between the terminal and the satellite (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). movement of the terminal device does not significantly change quality of service of the satellite). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves);
the distance between the terminal and a cell reference point;
GPS location information of the terminal;
a timing advance (TA) of the terminal;
a round-trip time (RTT) between the terminal and the satellite;
a propagation delay between the terminal and the satellite;
a CELL ID of a cell where the terminal currently resides;
a synchronization signal block index (SSB index) corresponding to the terminal;
a satellite beam index where the terminal resides; and
a bandwidth part identifier (BWP ID) activated by the terminal.
But Geng failed to teach the claim limitation wherein performing cell selection according to the location information of the terminal to obtain a third candidate cell list, and when the number of cells in the third candidate cell list is greater than 1.
However, Shinada teaches the limitation wherein performing cell selection according to the location information of the terminal to obtain a third candidate cell list, and when the number of cells in the third candidate cell list is greater than 1 (Shinada, page 3, paragraph 58; page 11, paragraph 151; page 12, paragraph 153-154; i.e., [0058] for each small cell, the search unit 33 searches for a small cell which the mobile terminal 5 that is in communication using the small cell is able to select as a move destination. Examples of the macrocell management table and the small cell management table; [0151] generating the microcell management table 43 and the small cell management table 44 is similar to when the number of small cells exceeds the threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Geng to substitute timing advance from Wang for coverage time from Geng to avoid intra-cell interference and ensure orthogonality of uplink transmission of respective terminals within a same cell (Wang, page 1, paragraph 2).
As to claim 3, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the type of the satellite comprises at least one of following types:
low earth orbit (LEO) satellite (Geng, page 4, paragraph 58; i.e., [0058] (2) Low-earth orbit (LEO) satellite: The satellite, at a speed of about 7 km/s, moves fast relative to ground. Therefore, a service coverage area provided by the LEO satellite also moves);
medium earth orbit (MEO) satellite;
geosynchronous orbit (GEO) satellite;
unmanned aerial system (UAS) platform satellite; and
highly elliptical orbit (HEO) satellite.
As to claim 4, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein a deployment scenario of the satellite, and before performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain the updated candidate cell list, the method further comprises performing cell selection according to the deployment scenario of the satellite to obtain a fourth candidate cell list, and when the number of cells in the fourth candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing the cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain the updated candidate cell list (Geng, page 4, paragraph 56-58; page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0056] A satellite system can be classified into the following three types based on a satellite height, that is, a satellite orbit height, a satellite between a high-earth orbit satellite and low-earth orbit satellite; [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves).
As to claim 5, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 4, wherein the first information further comprises: channel quality of the cell, and in a case where the candidate cell list after performing the cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite (Geng, page 4, paragraph 56-58; page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0056] A satellite system can be classified into the following three types based on a satellite height, that is, a satellite orbit height, a satellite between a high-earth orbit satellite and low-earth orbit satellite; [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device and a satellite track (satellite ephemeris). Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves) comprises more than 1 cell, the method further comprises at least one of: selecting a cell with better channel quality as the target cell (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the terminal device performs cell reselection based on location information (UE location) of the terminal device. Therefore, in a reselection process, the terminal device performs R-criterion sorting on a plurality of candidate cells that meet an S criterion only based on quality, and may reselect a target cell that quickly moves); or re-execute the cell selection process after waiting for a predetermined period of time
As to claim 6, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein receiving a system broadcast, wherein the first information is carried by the system broadcast (Geng, page 6, paragraph 88; i.e., [0088] The threshold and N may be notified to the terminal device in a broadcast message, a unicast message, or a multicast message. A beam whose beam quality is higher than the threshold is considered as a good beam).
As to claim 7, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the type of the satellite has a first priority, and the cell type of the satellite has a second priority, and wherein the first priority is higher than the second priority (Geng, page 5, paragraph 81-82; i.e., [0082] When the terminal device measures a plurality of cells that meet a reselection criterion, the terminal device sorts the cells by ranking values. For example, for frequencies or systems with the same priority, if the plurality of cells meet the reselection criterion, ranking may be performed based on cell quality. the terminal device reselects the cell with the highest ranking value and further determines whether the cell is suitable).
As to claim 20, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the cell type of the satellite comprises at least one of: a fixed cell type; or a mobile cell type (Geng, page 5, paragraph 73; i.e., [0073] the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) 38.304 v15.4.0 protocol related to a 5G).
Claim(s) 10-16 is/are directed to a system claims and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 1-7. Therefore, claim(s) 10-16 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 1-7.
Claim(s) 19 is/are directed to a non-transitory claim and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim(s) 19 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 11.
Claim(s) 8-9 & 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng, U.S. Pub/Patent No. US 2022/0217602 A1 in view of Shinada, US 2016/0135106 A1, and further in view of Turtinen, US 2022/0150972 A1.
As to claim 8, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 4. But since Geng-Shinada failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the deployment scenario of the satellite comprises at least one of the following: a transparent payload scenario; or a regenerative payload scenario.
However, Turtinen teaches the limitation wherein the deployment scenario of the satellite comprises at least one of the following: a transparent payload scenario; or a regenerative payload scenario (Turtinen, page 5, paragraph 89; i.e., [0089] the case of a regenerative payload scenario, that the gNB function is located in the satellite or UAS platform 20 or 30. Another possibility is, in the case of a transparent payload scenario).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Geng-Shinada to substitute GSM from Turtinen for NTN from Geng-Shinada to control element or function, wherein the reception time window is even to or greater than a difference between the maximum round trip time and the minimum round trip time (Turtinen, page 2, paragraph 47).
As to claim 9, Geng-Shinada teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein a finishing condition for cell selection comprises: a number of cells in a current candidate cell list is 1 (Geng, page 7, paragraph 117-119; i.e., [0117] ranking value of a cell x in the candidate cell; w is a preset weight value or a weight value configured is a sum of cell quality of all the cells (N in total) in the candidate cell, and N is an integer greater than 1. In some possible solutions, "all cells in the candidate cell" may include cells having a same priority, or a cell set that needs to be sorted to determine the target cells).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are directed to a system claims and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 8-9. Therefore, claim(s) 17-18 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 8-9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 has/have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant’s arguments include the failure of previously applied art to expressly disclose “when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list and updated cell list” (see Applicant’s response, 3/4/26, page 11-13). It is evident from the detailed mappings found in the above rejection(s) that Shinada disclosed this functionality (see Shinada, page 11, paragraph 151; page 12, paragraph 153-154). Further, it is clear from the numerous teachings (previously and currently cited) that the provision for “when the number of cells in the candidate cell list is greater than 1, performing cell selection according to the cell type of the satellite to obtain an updated candidate cell list and updated cell list” was widely implemented in the networking art. Thus, Applicant’s arguments drawn toward distinction of the claimed invention and the prior art teachings on this point are not considered persuasive.
Listing of Relevant Arts
Lundqvist, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20150257064 A1 discloses update the neighboring cell list and number of cells.
Kubota, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20140301369 A1 discloses number of the cells exceeding the threshold value; updates the adjacent cell list.
Contact Information
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
THUONG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3864. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/THUONG NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights