Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/254,395

SPECTRUM SHARING IN NTN-TN COORDINATION

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 25, 2023
Examiner
REYES ORTIZ, HECTOR E
Art Unit
2472
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
MediaTek Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
245 granted / 298 resolved
+24.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
329
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
59.2%
+19.2% vs TC avg
§102
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 298 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Detail Action This office action is in response to the communications filed on 12/14/2025. Claims Status Claims 5 and 7-23 have been cancelled. Claims 1-4, 6, and 24-26 are pending in this application. Notice of 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements received 11/20/2025 has been considered. Prior Art Made of Record The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tripathi et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0105693), the prior art discloses receiving from the gNB a system information [SIB] facilitating the UE to measure (and report when appropriate based on configured events) only the specified cells; figure 12 F12S4 & see ¶ 146. Furthermore, the system information facilitates selection of a specific cell such as a TN cell or an NTN cell of a specific type; figure 12 F12S4 & ¶ 150. Response to Arguments Applicant remarks, filed on 12/14/2025, argues that the cited portion of the prior art, individually or in combination, fails to discloses the features in claim 1, specifically those pertaining to the act of “ receiving by the processor, a system information block (SIB) signaling from the base station indicating whether a cell measured by the UE is of the TN or the NTN to identify measurement events for the TN or the NTN”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wang discloses a conditional handover (CHO) condition configuration is provided with the CHO information [measuring event], wherein the CHO information is broadcasted, by the source cell, in a system information block (SIB); see figure 2 & ¶ 35/43. The CHO information may include a candidate cell list, wherein the candidate cell list information is cell type such as NTN or TN; see figure 2 & ¶ 39-40. The CHO condition [measuring event] configuration can be at least one of the following: a RSRP threshold for the serving cell [TN] and a RSRP threshold for a candidate cell [NTN] in the CHO information; see figure 2 & ¶ 48. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Matsuda measuring system by incorporating the system information block (SIB) comprising the candidate cell list and the threshold for the NTN/TN cell(s). In addition, Applicant submits that the prior art appears not to expressly disclose that the CHO information in SIBx may be used to identify whether measurement events are for the TN or for the NTN. Examiner notes that the rejection has been modified without departing from the original rejection to explicitly indicate the information in the CHO identifying the cell type. For these reasons discussed above that the claim is met by the prior art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 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 AIA 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. Claim 1 and 24-26 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0099933, hereinafter referred to as Matsuda) in view of Wang et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0377832, hereinafter referred as Wang). Regarding Claim 1, Matsuda discloses measuring, by a processor of a user equipment (UE), a signal strength of each of one or more terrestrial network (TN) cells and one or more non-terrestrial network (NTN) cells; and reporting, by the processor, a result of the measuring to a network (A communication apparatus [UE] measure the reference signal from a source base station [TN cell] and a target base station [NTN cell], wherein the source base station is a terrestrial base station and the target base station is a non-terrestrial base station; see figure 14 step 402a/b-403 & ¶ 210. The communication apparatus sends the measured result to the source base station; see figure 14 step 404.). Matsuda discloses measuring the signal strength of the TN cell and the NTN cell, bit fails to explicitly disclose receiving by the processor, a system information block (SIB) signaling from the base station indicating whether a cell measured by the UE is of the TN or the NTN to identify measurement events for the TN or the NTN. However, in analogous art, Wang discloses a conditional handover (CHO) condition configuration is provided with the CHO information [measuring event], wherein the CHO information is broadcasted, by the source cell, in a system information block (SIB); see figure 2 & ¶ 35/43. The CHO information may include a candidate cell list, wherein the candidate cell list information is cell type such as NTN or TN; see figure 2 & ¶ 39-40. The CHO condition [measuring event] configuration can be at least one of the following: a RSRP threshold for the serving cell [TN] and a RSRP threshold for a candidate cell [NTN] in the CHO information; see figure 2 & ¶ 48. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the CHO information of Wang in order to techniques related to improve mobility performance by enabling to provide the handover command at an earlier time based on the source cell meeting the conditional handover (CHO) conditions; see ¶ 4. Regarding Claim 24, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose that the measurement events are specific for NTN cells, and TN cells. However, in analogous art, Wang discloses a conditional handover (CHO) condition configuration is provided with the CHO information [measuring event], wherein the CHO information is broadcasted, by the source cell, in a system information block (SIB); see figure 2 & ¶ 35/43. The CHO condition [measuring event] configuration can be at least one of the following: a RSRP threshold for the serving cell [TN] and a RSRP threshold for a candidate cell [NTN] in the CHO information; see figure 2 & ¶ 48. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the CHO information of Wang in order to improve mobility performance by enabling to provide the handover command at an earlier time based on the source cell meeting the conditional handover (CHO) conditions; see ¶ 4. Regarding Claim 25, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose a threshold used in the measurement events are specific for NTN cells, and TN cells for the same measurement event. However, in analogous art, Wang discloses a conditional handover (CHO) condition configuration is provided with the CHO information [measuring event], wherein the CHO information is broadcasted, by the source cell, in a system information block (SIB); see figure 2 & ¶ 35/43. The CHO condition [measuring event] configuration can be at least one of the following: a RSRP threshold for the serving cell [TN] and a RSRP threshold for a candidate cell [NTN] in the CHO information; see figure 2 & ¶ 48. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the CHO information of Wang in order to techniques related to improve mobility performance by enabling to provide the handover command at an earlier time based on the source cell meeting the conditional handover (CHO) conditions; see ¶ 4. Regarding Claim 26, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose the signaling from the base station indicating whether a cell measured by the UE is of the TN or the NTN is part of a system information block (SIB). However, in analogous art, Wang discloses that the source cell sending the CHO information in a system information block (SIB), wherein the CHO information includes the candidate cell selection information, wherein the candidate cell selection information is a cell type such as NTN or TN; see figure 2 & ¶ 35/37-38. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the CHO information of Wang in order to improve mobility performance by enabling to provide the handover command at an earlier time based on the source cell meeting the conditional handover (CHO) conditions; see ¶ 4. Claim 2 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0099933, hereinafter referred to as Matsuda) in in view of Wang et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0377832, hereinafter referred as Wang) and further in view of Tao et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0377828, hereinafter referred as Tao). Regarding Claim 2, Matsuda fails to disclose that the measuring comprises performing a synchronization signal block (SSB) measurement in an initial BWP of a cell among the one or more TN cells and the one or more NTN cells. However, in analogous art, Tao discloses that an SSB based measurement provided the center frequency of the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the serving cell [TN] and the center frequency of the SSB of the neighbor cell [NTN]; see ¶ 76. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the SSB mechanism of Tao in order to facilitates providing improved procedures for measurement and handover by enabling the UE considers different SSBs for different cells; see ¶ 5. Claims 3-4 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda, Wang, Tao, and further in view of Fan et al. (Publication No. US 2022/0263569, hereinafter referred as Fan). Regarding Claim 3, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose that the SSB measurement comprises an SSB measurement on the one or more NTN cells based on a long-term ephemeris. However, in analogous art, Fan discloses that the terminal device measures a synchronization signal block (SSB) of a neighboring cell according to the measurement window, wherein the measurement window is determined according to an ephemeris information; see figure 11 step 1104 & ¶ 207. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda system mechanism with the ephemeris information of Fan in order to improve the reliability of measurement synchronization in a satellite communication system by compensating for a difference in measurement time caused by different satellite service links; see ¶ 7. Regarding Claim 4, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose that the long-term ephemeris comprises a number of beams per NTN cell, mapping to SSBs, and a configuration of the initial BWP. However, in analogous art, Fan discloses that the terminal device measures a synchronization signal block (SSB) of a neighboring cell according [mapping] to the measurement window, wherein the measurement window is determined according to an ephemeris information; see figure 11 step 1104 & ¶ 207. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the ephemeris information of Fan in order to improve the reliability of measurement synchronization in a satellite communication system by compensating for a difference in measurement time caused by different satellite service links; see ¶ 7. Claim 6 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0099933, hereinafter referred to as Matsuda) in view of Wang et al. (Publication No. US 2021/0377832, hereinafter referred as Wang) and further in view of Gao et al. (Publication No. US 2023/0239717, hereinafter referred as Gao). Regarding Claim 6, Matsuda, as modified, fails to disclose receiving a higher-layer signaling from the network configuring a measurement object with respect to the one or more TN cells and the one or more NTN cells. However, in analogous art, Gao discloses that different cells are configured with a measurement object, wherein the measurement object is a list of objects on which the UE is to perform measurements, ¶ 25. For example, terrestrial network cells vs non-terrestrial network cells; see ¶ 25. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsuda measuring system with the measurement object of Gao in order to perform measurements on all the cells based on the SMTC configuration per measurement object during the measurement gap. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HECTOR REYES whose telephone number is (571)270-0239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5. 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, Kevin Bates can be reached on (571) 272-3980. 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. /H.R/Examiner, Art Unit 2472 /KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 25, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 14, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598478
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR COVERAGE AREA DEFICIENCY VISUALIZATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593227
DEADLINE-BASED DELIVERY FOR DOWNLINK TRAFFIC WITH JITTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587883
MEASURING A SUBSET OF REFERENCE SIGNALS BASED ON HISTORIC INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580719
FAST ACK/NACK IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563452
Selection of Edge Application Server
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
94%
With Interview (+11.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 298 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