DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed July 25, 2025 has been entered.
Claim 1-5, 6, 8-11, and 14-17 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 12-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberg et al (WO 2021/133239 A1) in view of Charbit (MediaTek, 2021).
Regarding Claim 1, Liberg teaches user equipment (UE) comprising [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 12, lines 22-27]:
a transceiver configured to receive, from a base station, at least one of an indication to preform a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) measurement [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 3-10 for base station, and lines 25-30 for GNSS measurements];
and information indicating an autonomous GNSS measurement [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 25-32];
and a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to perform GNSS measurements [page 13, lines 25-32]:
wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit, to the base station [page 12, lines 22-27].
Liberg fails to explicitly teach information on a validity duration associated with a GNSS, and wherein, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches transmit information on the validity duration associated with a GNSS [page 1, paragraphs 1-5],
and wherein, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension [[page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 2, Liberg teaches an indication to perform the GNSS measurement comprises information on a GNSS measurement gap length [page 36, lines 5-15].
Regarding Claim 5, Liberg fails to explicitly teach the processor is further configured to determine a validity time interval associated with a latest transmitted feedback information, the latest transmitted feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration, and the transceiver is further configured to transmit information associated with the determined validity time interval.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches the processor is further configured to determine a validity time interval the latest transmitted feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration, and the transceiver is further configured to transmit information associated with the determined validity time interval [page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 6, Liberg teaches the transceiver is further configured to receive information for transmission of a channel over a first number of slots, wherein the first number of slots includes one or more slots that overlap in time with slots of the measurement gap [page 8, lines 1-12 for transmit time for GNSS measurement gap];
and the processor is further configured to: drop the transmission of the channel during the measurement gap, postpone the transmission of the channel to slots after the measurement gap, or transmit the channel over the one or more slots that overlap in time and do not overlap in frequency with slots of the measurement gap [page 8, lines 10-20].
Regarding Claim 7, Liberg teaches the processor is further configured to determine that a validity time interval associated with GNSS measurements has expired, and the transceiver is further configured to transmit an indication that the validity time interval has expired [page 22, lines 3-23].
Regarding Claim 8, Liberg teaches a base station (BS) comprising [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 3-10 for base station, and lines 25-30 for GNSS measurements]:
a processor [page 6, lines 20-30]; and
a transceiver operably coupled to the processor, the transceiver configured to transmit to a user equipment (UE), at least one of an indication to perform a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) measurements [page 12, lines 22-27]:
and information indicating an autonomous GNSS measurement [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 25-32]; and
receive from the UE information [page 6, lines 1-15 for wireless device].
Liberg fails to explicitly teach receive information on a validity duration associated with a GNSS, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches transmit information on the validity duration associated with a GNSS [page 1, paragraphs 1-5],
and wherein, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension [[page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 9, Liberg teaches the indication to perform the GNSS measurement comprises information on a GNSS measurement gap length [page 36, lines 5-15].
Regarding Claim 12, Liberg fails to explicitly teach the processor is further configured to determine a validity time interval associated with a latest received feedback information, the latest received feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration, and the transceiver is further configured to receive information associated with the determined validity time interval.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches the processor is further configured to determine a validity time interval the latest transmitted feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration, and the transceiver is further configured to transmit information associated with the determined validity time interval [page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 13, Liberg teaches the processor is further configured to determine that a validity time interval associated with GNSS measurements has expired, and the transceiver is further configured to receive an indication that the validity time interval has expired [page 22, lines 3-23].
Regarding Claim 14, Liberg teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) the method comprising: [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 12, lines 22-27]:
receiving from a base station, at least one of an indication to perform a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) measurement [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 3-10 for base station, and lines 25-30 for GNSS measurements],
performing the GNSS measurements [page 6, lines 11-20 with page 13, lines 25-32];
transmitting to the base station information page 12, lines 22-27].
Liberg fails to explicitly teach receive information on a validity duration associated with a GNSS, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches transmit information on the validity duration associated with a GNSS [page 1, paragraphs 1-5],
and wherein, when a GNSS position becomes outdated, the UE does not perform an uplink transmission unless the UE is configured with an uplink transmissions extension [[page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 15, Liberg teaches receiving an indication to perform the GNSS measurements and information relating to a second time interval, wherein [page 8, lines 1-12 for transmit time for GNSS measurement gap]:
the second time interval is associated with the reception of the indication, and the start of the measurement gap is based on the indication to perform GNSS measurements and the second time interval [page 8, lines 10-20].
Regarding Claim 18, Liberg fails to explicitly teach determining a validity time interval associated with a latest transmitted feedback information, wherein the latest transmitted feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration; and transmitting information associated with the determined validity time interval.
Charbit has aspects related to UL synchronization and GNSS validity timer (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches the processor is further configured to determine a validity time interval the latest transmitted feedback information is a GNSS position fix time duration, and the transceiver is further configured to transmit information associated with the determined validity time interval [page 1, paragraphs 1-5].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Charbit for the purpose to assure a UE goes back to idle mode and re-acquire a GNSS position fix if GNSS becomes outdated (Charbit, page 1, second paragraph).
Regarding Claim 19, Liberg teaches receiving information for transmission of a channel over a first number of slots, wherein the first number of slots includes one or more slots that overlap in time with slots of the measurement gap [page 8, lines 1-12 for transmit time for GNSS measurement gap];
and one of: dropping the transmission of the channel during the measurement gap, postponing the transmission of the channel to slots after the measurement gap, or transmitting the channel over the one or more slots that overlap in time and do not overlap in frequency with slots of the measurement gap [page 8, lines 10-20].
Regarding Claim 20, Liberg teaches determining that a validity time interval associated with GNSS measurements has expired [page 22, lines 3-23];
and transmitting an indication that the validity time interval has expired [page 22, lines 3-23].
Claims 3-4, 10-11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberg et al (WO 2021/133239 A1) in view of Charbit (MediaTek, 2021) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 14 above, and further in view of Chincholi et al (US 2019/0174341 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, 10, and 16, Liberg fails to explicitly teach the indication to perform the GNSS measurement is associated with a GNSS measurement command medium access control control element (MAC CE), and the information on the validity duration associated with the GNSS is associated with GNSS validity duration report MAC CE.
Chincholi has methods for determining a scheduled occurrence of a measurement gap (abstract) and teaches the indication to perform the GNSS measurement is associated with a GNSS measurement command medium access control control element (MAC CE), and the information on the validity duration associated with the GNSS is associated with GNSS validity duration report MAC CE [0123, 0127].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the duration calculations as taught by Chincholi for the purpose to terminates the gap if at least 6 SFs have been coherently averaged in the gaps (Chincholi, 0123).
Regarding Claim 4, 11, and 17, Liberg fails to explicitly teach when the indication to perform the GNSS measurement is received in subframe index n or earlier, a start of a measurement gap is in subframe index n+k.
Chincholi has methods for determining a scheduled occurrence of a measurement gap (abstract) and teaches when the indication to perform the GNSS measurement is received in subframe index n or earlier, a start of a measurement gap is in subframe index n+k [0052-0053].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the satellite time techniques, as disclosed by Liberg, further including the subframe calculations as taught by Chincholi for the purpose to perform channel estimation, channel quality measurements (Chincholi, 0053).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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. Liberg, Charlit, and Chincholi teach the current claims.
In applicant’s arguments page 2, second paragraph the applicant states that the references do not teach validity duration associated with GNSS. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Charlit teaches validity duration with GNSS for measurement gaps [Charlit, page 1].
In applicant’s arguments page 3, second paragraph the applicant states that the references do not teach when the position is outdated, the UE does not perform uplink transmission. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Charlit teaches the duration of the transmission is related to the validity timer for uplink synchronization [Charlit, pages 1-2].
In applicant’s arguments page 4, third paragraph the applicant states that the references do not teach autonomous GNSS measurements. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Liberg teaches the using triggers (autonomous) to determine gap length with predefined instructions [Liberg, page 8, lines 1-12].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, William Kelleher can be reached on 571-272-7753 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648