Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/249,810

TIME OFFSET MAINTENANCE FOR NONTERRESTRIAL NETWORK (NTN)

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 20, 2023
Examiner
RENNER, BRANDON M
Art Unit
2411
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Apple Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
758 granted / 930 resolved
+23.5% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
986
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
49.6%
+9.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 930 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/17/2025 has been entered. 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 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. Claim(s) 1, 19, 71, 79, 83, 86, 90, 92 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. “Kim” US 20190082408 in view of Lin US 2022/0287048 and further in view of Nishio et al. “Nishio” US 2023/0049008 Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a baseband (BB) processor (Figure 11 and paragraph 293 teaches baseband processing) for a user equipment (UE) operating in a network with a base station, configured to perform operations comprising: Receiving, from a base station, a timing offset indication signal comprising a time offset (a base station sends a TA command to the UE (i.e. time offset indication). The offset is a time difference between UL and DL between a base station and UE; Paragraphs 209 and 212. TA means a timing offset; Paragraph 171); Receiving, from a base station, timing information (a base station sends another (i.e. second) TA command to the UE using a MAC-CE; Paragraph 211. TA means a timing offset; Paragraph 171, thus this is a subsequent time offset. The term “Relative value” bears no real meaning thus any offset value is viewed as the relative value); and Determining an updated time offset (based on the received second TA command, the UE performs a TA modification/update using the received TA value; Paragraphs 211-212. Thus, the first TA is updated with the second TA offset. The modification/update is the adjustment. Kim does not expressly disclose sending/receiving time offsets, or updated time offsets, in a NTN network; however, Lin teaches a base station sending UE and cell specific time offset information to a UE; Figures 8 and 9, see paragraphs 105. The base station can be a NTN base station; Paragraph 107. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include UE/cell-specific offset information and operating in a NTN environment as taught by Lin. One would be motivated to make the modification such that information can be properly transmit from a UE to the base station in according with the scheduled timing as taught by Lin; Paragraph 105 and also to provide the flexibility of operating on various networks including NTN; Paragraph 107. The prior art does not teach or suggest timing drift rates being used to determine offsets (updated offsets) and sending updates to the base station; however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. The terminal may use this received information to calculate TA offsets (i.e. determine updated offsets based on timing drift); Paragraph 118. Further, the terminal can adjust the timing (i.e. update) and the base station is notified of this TA adjustment in the TA value report; Paragraphs 123-124 see figure 8 Steps s101-s104. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include timing drift rates used to calculate offsets as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Regarding claim 19, Kim teaches a baseband (BB) processor for a base station operating in a network with a User Equipment, configured to perform operations comprising: sending, to the UE, a timing offset indication signal comprising a time offset (a base station sends a TA command to the UE (i.e. time offset indication). The offset is a time difference between UL and DL between a base station and UE; Paragraphs 209 and 212. TA means a timing offset; Paragraph 171); sending, to the UE, timing offset indication signal (a base station sends another (i.e. second) TA command to the UE using a MAC-CE; Paragraph 211. TA means a timing offset; Paragraph 171, thus this is a subsequent time offset). Kim does not expressly disclose sending/receiving UE/cell-specific time offsets in a NTN network; however, Lin teaches a base station sending UE and cell specific time offset information to a UE; Figures 8 and 9, see paragraphs 105. The base station can a NTN base station; Paragraph 107. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include UE/cell-specific offset information and operating in a NTN environment as taught by Lin. One would be motivated to make the modification such that information can be properly transmit from a UE to the base station in according with the scheduled timing as taught by Lin; Paragraph 105 and also to provide the flexibility of operating on various networks including NTN; Paragraph 107. The prior art does not teach or suggest timing drift rates being used to determine offsets (updated offsets); however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. The terminal may use this received information to calculate TA offsets (i.e. determine updated offsets based on timing drift); Paragraph 118. Further, the terminal can adjust the timing (i.e. update) and the base station is notified of this TA adjustment in the TA value report; Paragraphs 123-124 see figure 8 Steps s101-s104. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include timing drift rates used to calculate offsets as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Regarding claim 71, Kim teaches a method for operating user equipment (UE) in a network, comprising: Receiving, from a base station, a timing offset indication signal comprising a time offset (a base station sends a TA command to the UE (i.e. time offset indication). The offset is a time difference between UL and DL between a base station and UE; Paragraphs 209 and 212. TA means a timing offset; Paragraph 171); Determining an updated time offset (based on the received second TA command, the UE performs a TA modification/update using the received TA value; Paragraphs 211-212. Thus, the first TA is updated with the second TA offset. The modification/update is the adjustment. Further, the claims states the time offset is adjusted according to the relative time offset. As both of these offsets are known prior to the modification, the modification is seen as “According to” the relative time offset value. Further, paragraphs 229-330 disclose the use of the TA MAC-CE for syncing between the UE and base station (Communication)). Kim does not expressly disclose sending/receiving UE/cell-specific time offsets in a NTN network; however, Lin teaches a base station sending UE and cell specific time offset information to a UE; Figures 8 and 9, see paragraphs 105. The base station can be a NTN base station; Paragraph 107. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include UE/cell-specific offset information and operating in a NTN environment as taught by Lin. One would be motivated to make the modification such that information can be properly transmit from a UE to the base station in according with the scheduled timing as taught by Lin; Paragraph 105 and also to provide the flexibility of operating on various networks including NTN; Paragraph 107. The prior art does not teach or suggest timing drift rates being used to determine offsets (updated offsets); however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. The terminal may use this received information to calculate TA offsets (i.e. determine updated offsets based on timing drift); Paragraph 118. Further, the terminal can adjust the timing (i.e. update) and the base station is notified of this TA adjustment in the TA value report; Paragraphs 123-124 see figure 8 Steps s101-s104. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include timing drift rates used to calculate offsets as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Regarding claim 79, Kim does not teach slots being the offset; however, Lin teaches offset information can be a number of slots; Paragraphs 83 and 91. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include the cell-specific offset information to include a number of slots as taught by Lin. One would be motivated to make the modification such that information can be properly transmit from a UE to the base station in according with the scheduled timing as taught by Lin; Paragraph 105 and also to provide the flexibility of operating on various networks including NTN; Paragraph 107. Regarding claim 83, Kim does not teach slots being the offset; however, Lin teaches offset information can be a number of slots; Paragraphs 83 and 91. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include the cell-specific offset information to include a number of slots as taught by Lin. One would be motivated to make the modification such that information can be properly transmit from a UE to the base station in according with the scheduled timing as taught by Lin; Paragraph 105 and also to provide the flexibility of operating on various networks including NTN; Paragraph 107. Regarding claim 86, The prior art does not teach or suggest the drift rate is a common drift rate; however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. This information is broadcast from the base station thus viewed as common because a broadcast will go to more than one device; Paragraph 118. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include common drift rates as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Regarding claim 90, The prior art does not teach or suggest the drift rate is a common drift rate; however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. This information is broadcast from the base station thus viewed as common because a broadcast will go to more than one device; Paragraph 118. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include common drift rates as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Regarding claim 92, The prior art does not teach or suggest the drift rate is a common drift rate; however, Nishio teaches information sent to a UE from a base station can including timing drift rates of the propagation delay. This information is broadcast from the base station thus viewed as common because a broadcast will go to more than one device; Paragraph 118. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include common drift rates as taught by Nishio. One would be motivated to make the modification such that based on received signaling from a base station, the UE can calculate the TA offset at a current time from the cell-specific offset as taught by Nishio; Paragraph 118. Claim(s) 76, 80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Lin in view of Nishio and further in view of Aldana et al. “Aldana” US 2020/0120458 Regarding claim 76, While the prior art teaches long propagation delays for NTN and the time offset is indicative of delay between UL/DL, the prior art does not expressly disclose value is at least 2x the propagation delay; however, Aldana teaches satellite networks (Paragraphs 167 and 828). Aldana further teaches multiple timing advances (TAs) which are provided by network nodes (Paragraph 615). TA1 and TA2 can be equal to twice the propagation delay; Paragraphs 813 and 814. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include operating in a satellite network and having the TA values be at least 2X the propagation delay as taught by Aldana. One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UL and DL can arrive simultaneously at the network node and in sync with the terminal devices timing schedule as taught by Aldana; Paragraph 813. Regarding claim 80, While the prior art teaches long propagation delays for NTN and the time offset is indicative of delay between UL/DL, the prior art does not expressly disclose value is at least 2x the propagation delay; however, Aldana teaches satellite networks (Paragraphs 167 and 828). Aldana further teaches multiple timing advances (TAs) which are provided by network nodes (Paragraph 615). TA1 and TA2 can be equal to twice the propagation delay; Paragraphs 813 and 814. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Kim to include operating in a satellite network and having the TA values be at least 2X the propagation delay as taught by Aldana. One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UL and DL can arrive simultaneously at the network node and in sync with the terminal devices timing schedule as taught by Aldana; Paragraph 813. Claim(s) 89, 95 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view Lin in view of Nishio and further in view of Kung et al. “Kung” US 2020/0351855 Regarding claim 89, the prior art does not disclose the user sending an offset update notification signal including to the base station upon determining a TA value exceeds a threshold; however, Kung teaches that a device sends a second signal to the base station. This information includes timing/offset information; Paragraph 557. Further, this timing offset information is used for updating the first and/or second information which is sent/received between the UE and base station. This information is updated from a fixed time period to a different fixed time period in response to a value indicated in the RRC. As this value would be different, this is viewed as a threshold being exceeded; Paragraph 575. The Examiner suggests better defining what the threshold value is to better define the claim language and overcome the interpretation of the Examiner. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include sending updated offset information to the base station as taught by Kung. One would be motivated to make the modification such the UE and base station can properly sync up for sending/receiving data on the proper time/frequency resources as taught by Kung; Paragraphs 557 and 575. Regarding claim 95, the prior art does not disclose the user sending an offset update notification signal including to the base station upon determining a TA value exceeds a threshold; however, Kung teaches that a device sends a second signal to the base station. This information includes timing/offset information; Paragraph 557. Further, this timing offset information is used for updating the first and/or second information which is sent/received between the UE and base station. This information is updated from a fixed time period to a different fixed time period in response to a value indicated in the RRC. As this value would be different, this is viewed as a threshold being exceeded; Paragraph 575. The Examiner suggests better defining what the threshold value is to better define the claim language and overcome the interpretation of the Examiner. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include sending updated offset information to the base station as taught by Kung. One would be motivated to make the modification such the UE and base station can properly sync up for sending/receiving data on the proper time/frequency resources as taught by Kung; Paragraphs 557 and 575. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 17, 87, 88, 91, 93, 94 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 15-17, 19, 71-85 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. 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. /BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 20, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 05, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12581434
TIME SYNCHRONIZATION OVER A WIRELESS NETWORK FOR LATENCY-SENSITIVE TRAFFIC
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574765
RESETTING A BEAM BASED AT LEAST IN PART ON A SUBCARRIER SPACING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568526
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562845
COMMUNICATION METHOD, COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556430
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING A TEMPORARY GATEWAY FOR AD-HOCK DATA NEEDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.9%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 930 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month