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 .
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-7, drawn to a system for multi-domain cell selection, classified in H04W 60/00.
II. Claims 8-15, drawn to a method of controlling handovers in a cellular telecommunication system that includes communicating a handover instruction to the UE, the handover instruction comprising an indication to the UE to connect to the neighboring cell based at least on a determination that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN, classified in H04W 36/00698.
III. Claims 16-20, drawn to a method of controlling handovers in a cellular telecommunication system that includes implementing a modified handover procedure based at least in part on a determination that the second RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN, the modified handover procedure causing the UE to remain camped on the first RAN node despite the second RSRP value being greater than the first RSRP value, classified in H04W 36/00837.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II and I and III are unrelated (i.e., system for multi-domain cell selection v/s methods for controlling handovers) while inventions II and III are related processes (i.e.,
method for controlling handovers).
Inventions are unrelated if it can be shown that they are not disclosed as capable of use together and they have different designs, modes of operation, and effects (MPEP § 802.01 and § 806.06). In the instant case, invention I is directed to system for multi-domain cell selection through the communication of a registration request while inventions II and III are directed to controlling handovers by either communicating a handover instruction to the UE (invention II) or by implementing a modified handover procedure (invention III).
The related inventions II and III are distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed are either not capable of use together or can have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions do not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed are not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j). In the instant case, the inventions II and III as claimed have a materially different mode of operation as invention II controls the handover by communicating a handover instruction to the UE, the handover instruction comprising an indication to the UE to connect to the neighboring cell based at least on a determination that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN while invention III controls the handover by implementing a modified handover procedure based at least in part on a determination that the second RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN, the modified handover procedure causing the UE to remain camped on the first RAN node despite the second RSRP value being greater than the first RSRP value. Furthermore, the inventions II and III as claimed do not encompass overlapping subject matter and there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a
serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of
the following reasons apply:
a) The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; and
b) The inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should Applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, Applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the Examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Patrick J. Sullivan on June 12, 2025 a provisional
election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-7. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office Action. Claims 8-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the Examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on November 19, 2024 and April 3, 2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: On line 6 of paragraph 00039, insert --has-- after “satellite 306”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informality: On line 4 of claim 7, insert –and-- after “suitable”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Määttänen et al. (US 2023/0319661 A1).
Consider claim 1, Määttänen et al. clearly disclose a system for multi-domain cell selection (in the form of wireless device 110 in figure 6), the system comprising:
one or more antennas configured to wirelessly communicate with a terrestrial base station and one or more satellites (antenna(s) 111 in figure 6 and paragraphs 0078 and 0132 – wireless device 110 (i.e., UE) has terrestrial network (TN) and non-terrestrial network (NTN) capabilities hence it can wirelessly communicate with a terrestrial base station and one or more satellites via antenna(s) 111); and
one or more computer processing components (see, among other components, interface
114 and processing circuitry 120 that are part of the wireless device 110 in figure 6) configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first set of synchronization signals from a first radio access network (RAN)
node (see figures 3, 4, and 6 step 508 and, for example, paragraphs 0025, 0031 lines 1-12, 0078, 0110 lines 1-3, 0186, and 0187 – wireless device 110 receives Synchronization Signal Blocks (SSBs) of one or more cells including cells in different RATs such as a TN RAT (through a base station (read as second RAN node)) and an NTN RAT (through a satellite (read as first RAN node));
receiving a second set of synchronization signals from a second RAN node ((see figures 3, 4, and 6 step 508 and, for example, paragraphs 0025, 0031 lines 1-12, 0078, 0110 lines 1-3, 0186, and 0187 – wireless device 110 receives Synchronization Signal Blocks (SSBs) of one or more cells including cells in different RATs such as a TN RAT (through a base station (read as second RAN node)) and an NTN RAT (through a satellite (read as first RAN node));
determining that each of the first RAN node and the second RAN node are suitable (see
paragraphs 0010 (which defines what a suitable cell is) and 0180 – where an implication is disclosed that a suitable TN cell (i.e., base station – second RAN node) and NTN cell (i.e., satellite – first RAN node) have been found before the wireless device 110 selects or reselects one of these cells); and
communicate a registration request to the second RAN node based at least in part on
determination that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN and the second RAN node is associated with a terrestrial RAN (see figure 10 step 510, figure 11 step 608, and paragraphs 0098, 0110, and 0183-0194 – wireless device 110 prioritize and initiates the selection/reselection of the TN cell (i.e., second RAN node in the form of a base station) over the NTN cell (i.e., first RAN node in the form of a satellite). After the selection/reselection is completed, the wireless device is provided with user data hence, it is at the very least implicit or inherent, that some kind of registration request have been communicated to the TN cell by the
wireless device 110 in order for the device 110 to be able and allow to receive user data in the new selected/reselected TN cell).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Määttänen et al. further disclose wherein determining that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN and the second RAN node is associated with a terrestrial RAN is based on a determination that a first PLMN of the first RAN node is associated with the satellite RAN and that a second PLMN of the of the second RAN node is associated with the terrestrial RAN (see paragraph 0106 where PLMN IDs are being used to prioritized TN cells (i.e., second RAN nodes in the form of base stations) over NTN cells (i.e., first RAN nodes in the form of satellites) hence a determination is being made that a first PLMN is associated with the satellite RAN and a second PLMN is associated with the terrestrial RAN).
Consider claims 3 and 4, and as applied to claim 2 above, Määttänen et al. further disclose wherein a first set of key performance indicator (KPI) values of the first set of synchronization signals is greater than a second set of KPI values of the second set of synchronization signals (see paragraphs 0096-0100 – where the current or best NTN cell is stick to which implies that KPI values of the NTN cell (QNTN) are greater than KPI values of the TN cell (QTN)) and wherein each of the first set of KPI values and the second set of KPI values comprise a reference signal receive power (RSRP) and a reference signal receive quality (RSRQ) (see paragraph 0096 – RSRP and RSRQ are being used).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 4 above, Määttänen et al. further disclose
wherein a delta between the first set of values and the second set of values is less than a predetermined threshold (see paragraphs 0096-0100 - If one or more TN is/are found; and the best of the found TN(s) has a quality QtnBestt > Qntn – TnNtnOffset; and the best of the found TN(s) has a quality QtnBestt > Qmin select the best of the found TN(s); Else if Qntn < Qmin Select the best of the available NTN(s) and TN(s); (Else Stick to the current (or best) NTN.)).
Consider claim 6, and as applied to claim 5 above, Määttänen et al. further disclose wherein the first RAN node is in low earth orbit (see paragraphs 0049, 0050, and 0110 – NTN cell could be from a low earth orbit (LEO) satellite hence the first RAN node could be on a LEO orbit).
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 6 above, Määttänen et al. further disclose wherein the one or more computer processing components (see, among other components, interface 114 and processing circuitry 120 that are part of the wireless device 110 in figure 6) are further configured to:
receive a third set of synchronization signals from a third RAN node ((see figures 3, 4, and 6 step 508 and, for example, paragraphs 0025, 0031 lines 1-12, 0078, 0110 lines 1-3, 0186, and 0187 – wireless device 110 receives Synchronization Signal Blocks (SSBs) of one or more cells including cells in different RATs such as a TN RAT (through a base station (read as second RAN node)) and an NTN RAT (through a satellite (read as first RAN node) and when this is read in the context of the example of paragraph 0100 where the current or best NTN cell is stick to, it is implied that synchronization signals are being received from another node (i.e., a third RAN node that could be now the best NTN cell)));
determine the third RAN node is suitable (see paragraphs 0010 (which defines what a
suitable cell is) and 0180 – where an implication is disclosed that a suitable TN cell (i.e., base
station – second RAN node) and NTN cell (i.e., satellite – first RAN node) have been found before the wireless device 110 selects or reselects one of these cells and when this is read in the context of the example of paragraph 0100 where the current or best NTN cell is stick to, it is
implied that another node is also suitable (i.e., a third RAN node that could be now the best NTN
cell)); and
determine a third set of KPI values of the third set of synchronization signals is greater than each of the first set of KPI values and the second set of KPI values (see paragraphs 0096-0100 – where the current or best NTN cell is stick to which implies that KPI values of the best NTN cell (i.e., third RAN node) is greater that the KPI values of NTN cell (QNTN) (i.e., current – first RAN node) and the KPI values of the TN cell (QTN) (i.e., second RAN node)).
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 2023/0269635 A1).
Consider claim 1, Xu et al. clearly disclose system for multi-domain cell selection (in the form of User Equipment (UE) 110-1, 110-2 in figures 1, 2, and 4), the system comprising:
one or more antennas configured to wirelessly communicate with a terrestrial base station and one or more satellites (one or more antennas 210 in figures 2 and 4 and paragraphs 0019, 0022, 0024, 0038, and 0055 – where the UEs 110 use the one or more antennas 210 to wireless communicate with a terrestrial base station and one or more satellites as shown in figure 1); and
one or more computer processing components (processor(s) 410 and communication circuitry 420 in figure 4) configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first set of synchronization signals from a first radio access network (RAN)
node (see figure 1, figure 10 step 1010, and paragraphs 0022, 0024, 0038, and 0120 - UEs 110 can communicate with a first RAN node such as a satellite 160-1, 160-2 hence UEs 110 can receive synchronization signals from the satellites 160 since it is capable of communicating with them);
receiving a second set of synchronization signals from a second RAN node (see figure 1, figure 10 step 1010, and paragraphs 0022, 0024, 0038, and 0120 - UEs 110 can communicate with a second RAN node such as a base station 122-1, 122-2 hence UEs 110 can receive synchronization signals from the base stations 122 since it is capable of communicating with them);
determining that each of the first RAN node and the second RAN node are suitable (see the abstract, figure 10 step 1010, and paragraphs 0068, 0120, 0126, 0132, 0135, and 0141 suitable cells are determined including the NTN cells (i.e., satellites 160 – first RAN node) and TN cells (i.e., base stations 122 – second RAN node); and
communicate a registration request to the second RAN node based at least in part on a determination that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN and the second RAN node is associated with a terrestrial RAN (see the abstract, figure 10 step 1040, and paragraphs 0012, 0113, and 0123 – UE 110 camps on the highest ranked cell selected and when prioritization, as disclosed, is considered it means that it camps on the TN cell (i.e., base station 122 – second RAN node) instead of the NTN cell (i.e., satellite 160 – first RAN node) and thus communicates some kind of registration request which is required in order to camp on the cell).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Xu et al. further disclose wherein determining that the first RAN node is associated with a satellite RAN and the second RAN node is associated with a terrestrial RAN is based on a determination that a first PLMN of the first RAN node is associated with the satellite RAN and that a second PLMN of the of the second RAN node is associated with the terrestrial RAN (see paragraph 0068 and 0112-0114 where a PLMN identity list is being used to prioritized TN cells (i.e., second RAN nodes in the form of base stations) over NTN cells (i.e., first RAN nodes in the form of satellites) hence a determination is being made that a first PLMN is associated with the satellite RAN and a second PLMN is associated with the terrestrial RAN).
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 2 above, Xu et al. further disclose wherein a first set of key performance indicator (KPI) values of the first set of synchronization signals is greater than a second set of KPI values of the second set of synchronization signals (see paragraphs 0069, 0106, 0112-0114, 0120, and 0123 – in particular scenarios KPI values of NTN cells are determined to be greater than KPI values of TN cells).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2024/0098597 A1) discloses handover between terrestrial and non-terrestrial network.
Roy et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2024/0236833 A1) disclose systems and methods for selecting non-terrestrial networks in communication networks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) should be directed to Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez whose telephone number is (571)272-7915. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday
from 6:15 am to 4:15 pm EST.
SPE 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.
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.
Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez
R.P.G./rpg
/Rafael Perez-Gutierrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642
June 14, 2025
Prosecution Insights