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 .
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) 1-8, 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji WO 2023059420 in view of Grau GB 2605457
1. A method of a terminal device reporting a Timing Advance TA in a Non-Terrestrial Network NTN, comprising:
triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a Radio Access Control RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, or receiving a TA reporting function configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device (Ji: [0131] a UE may report its UE specific TA to a network at the time of a RACH procedure or in the RRC CONNECTED state, if enabled by the network).
Ji merely discloses the term “NTN”
Grau further teaches the term NTN (Grau: abstract, non-terrestrial network (NTN))
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to travel longer distances than in non-NTN radio networks since they are relayed via satellites, as taught by Grau.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein a TA reporting event comprises a variation amount of a current TA value of the terminal device relative to a TA value reported at a latest time being greater than or equal to a TA offset threshold (Ji: [0131, 0134] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
3. The method according to claim 2, wherein the TA offset threshold is configured for event-triggering TA reporting, the TA offset threshold is configured for the terminal device to estimate whether the variation amount between the current TA value and the TA value reported at the latest time exceeds the TA offset threshold (Ji: [0131, 0134] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
4. The method according to claim 2, wherein the TA offset threshold is configured by the network device (Grau: fig. 6, unit S02 -The base station 6 can set an appropriate TA reporting periodicity and threshold(s) and TAT value(s)). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to travel longer distances than in non-NTN radio networks since they are relayed via satellites, as taught by Grau.
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein the triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, comprises: triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having reported the TA, or the terminal device having not reported the TA, in response to the terminal device in the RRC connection state receiving the TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device (Ji: [0131] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, comprises:
in response to the terminal device in the RRC connection state receiving the TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device, triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having not reported the TA; not triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having reported the TA (Ji: [0131] the UE may update its TA to the network, whether periodically or aperiodic ally, e.g. based on a configured event trigger. As an example, the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
7. The method according to claim 5, wherein the terminal device having reported the TA comprises: the terminal device having reported the TA to the network device in a Random Access Channel RACH process; or the terminal device having reported the TA to the network device after entering the RRC connection state (Ji: [0131] a UE may report it UE specific TA to a network at the time of a RACH procedure or in the RRC CONNECTED state, if enabled by the network).
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the TA comprises an actual TA of the terminal device, or a TA amount related to the actual TA of the terminal device (Grau: page. 16, solution 2 – actual TA). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to travel longer distances than in non-NTN radio networks since they are relayed via satellites, as taught by Grau.
Regarding claims 12-18, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-8, where the difference used is a “terminal” with a processor and a memory (Ji: Referring to FIG. 3, the 300 includes a processor 316/356, a memory 376/360) and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims arid interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
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) 1-8, 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji WO 2023059420 in view of Cheng US 20220369264
1. A method of a terminal device reporting a Timing Advance TA in a Non-Terrestrial Network NTN, comprising:
triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a Radio Access Control RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, or receiving a TA reporting function configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device (Ji: [0131] a UE may report its UE specific TA to a network at the time of a RACH procedure or in the RRC CONNECTED state, if enabled by the network).
Ji merely discloses the term “NTN”
Cheng further teaches the term NTN (Cheng: fig. 1, non-terrestrial network (NTN) gateway)
Cheng further teaches triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a Radio Access Control RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, or receiving a TA reporting function configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device (Cheng: [0128] The TA report may be carried via the RRCREconfigurationComp message in the RRC CONNECTED state after the UE receives a TA report request by an RRC message including the RRCReconfiguration or another RRC message).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to make improvements in timing alignment for Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) wireless communication, as taught by Cheng.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein a TA reporting event comprises a variation amount of a current TA value of the terminal device relative to a TA value reported at a latest time being greater than or equal to a TA offset threshold (Ji: [0131, 0134] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
3. The method according to claim 2, wherein the TA offset threshold is configured for event-triggering TA reporting, the TA offset threshold is configured for the terminal device to estimate whether the variation amount between the current TA value and the TA value reported at the latest time exceeds the TA offset threshold (Ji: [0131, 0134] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
4. The method according to claim 2, wherein the TA offset threshold is configured by the network device (Cheng: [0088-0092] K_offset is provided by an RRC message from a gNB to an NTN UE). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to make improvements in timing alignment for Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) wireless communication, as taught by Cheng.
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein the triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, comprises: triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having reported the TA, or the terminal device having not reported the TA, in response to the terminal device in the RRC connection state receiving the TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device (Ji: [0131] the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the triggering TA reporting, by the terminal device, in response to the terminal device in a RRC connection state receiving a TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from a network device, comprises: in response to the terminal device in the RRC connection state receiving the TA reporting event configuration/reconfiguration message from the network device, triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having not reported the TA; not triggering, by the terminal device, the TA reporting, in a case of the terminal device having reported the TA (Ji: [0131] the UE may update its TA to the network, whether periodically or aperiodic ally, e.g. based on a configured event trigger. As an example, the UE may provide an aperiodic TA update in response to a change in the TA that is beyond a threshold level of change).
7. The method according to claim 5, wherein the terminal device having reported the TA comprises: the terminal device having reported the TA to the network device in a Random Access Channel RACH process; or the terminal device having reported the TA to the network device after entering the RRC connection state (Ji: [0131] a UE may report it UE specific TA to a network at the time of a RACH procedure or in the RRC CONNECTED state, if enabled by the network).
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the TA comprises an actual TA of the terminal device, or a TA amount related to the actual TA of the terminal device (Cheng: [0102-0104] UE-specific TA timer/value). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Ji’s invention in order to make improvements in timing alignment for Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) wireless communication, as taught by Cheng.
Regarding claims 12-18, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-8, where the difference used is a “terminal” with a processor and a memory (Ji: Referring to FIG. 3, the 300 includes a processor 316/356, a memory 376/360) and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims arid interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 3/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant Argument:
Applicant respectfully elects Group I (claims 1-8, 12-18) with traversal.
Response to Arguments:
With respect to the above argument, Examiner would like to draw attention to that
the Applicant’s traversal has been considered but it not persuasive. The elected Group I is directed to method related to a first device (e.g., UE or mobile device), whereas non-elected Groups is/are directed to method of a network node which are totally distinct and related to separate function(s). Thus, for the above reason, the restriction requirement is maintained.
Remark:
The examiner stresses that the claims are too broad and require detail or specialization of the steps as recited in the claims. Alone and as claimed, the limitations are too open.
Examiner has cited particular portions of the references as applied to each claim limitation for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Regarding all other arguments presented by applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the Examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
In addition, an interview could expedite the prosecution.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sulaiman Nooristany whose telephone number is (571) 270-1929. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9 to 5. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jeffrey Rutkowski, can be reached on (571) 270-1215. 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. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SULAIMAN NOORISTANY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights