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 .
Response to Arguments
Following response to arguments is based on Applicant’s arguments filed on 04 May 2026.
Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 102/103
Applicant’s arguments [Pages 1-9] with respect to rejection of claims 1, 9, 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art reference(s).
Regarding claim 1, on pages 3-8, Applicant argues that prior art of record fails to teach A) “transmitting ephemeris information of the satellite to a terminal… predicts locations of the satellite…”, B) “calculates assistance information based on predicted locations of the satellite…”, C) “round-trip times… estimates a location of the terminal using RTTs”.
Newly found reference Sayeed discloses a system (Figs. 2-3), where a satellite 110 shares its ephemeris info to UE 102, so that the UE 102 predicts location of the satellite 110 during a time period, thus using the RTTs in Marshall to estimate location of the UE 102. The times being used for the calculations are times considered during a first position and the time lasting until returning to the position, thus being RTTs. [Paragraphs 7-8, 25-26, 32, 35-37, 43].
Regarding claims 9 and 14, these claims have been amended to incorporate similar limitations to those set forth in independent claim 1, and are rejected based on similar reasoning.
Therefore, in view of the above reasons, the Examiner maintains the rejections.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 6, 9, 14 have been amended. Claims 7, 12, 17 have been canceled. Thus, claims 1-7, 8-11, 13-16, 18 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Second Paragraph
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 1:
At line 10, it is unclear whether “predicted locations” should refer to the previous recitation of “predicted locations”.
For claim 9:
At lines 8-9, “the predicted locations of the satellite” lacks of antecedent basis.
For claim 9:
At lines 9-10, “the predicted locations of the satellite” lacks of antecedent basis.
For claims 2-6, 8, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18:
These claims are also rejected as they depend upon a rejected claim.
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 of this title, 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 1-4, 6, 9-11, 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324111) in view of Sayeed et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0256865).
Regarding claim 1, Marshall teaches a method of a satellite (Fig. 1), comprising:
[
transmitting a request signal requesting a terminal to periodically report assistance information for round-trip time calculation (BS 172 asks UE 112 to frequently report assistance info for RTT [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]);
receiving the assistance information periodically reported from the terminal (UE 112 reporting the assistance info to BS 172 [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]);
calculating round-trip times [(RTT is then estimated based on the assistance info [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]); and
estimating a location of the terminal using the round trip times (then the location of UE 112 is determined [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]),
[.
However, Marshall does not explicitly mention: transmitting ephemeris information of the satellite to a terminal… corresponding to predicted locations of the satellite… wherein the assistance information is information calculated by the terminal based on predicted locations of the satellite and the predicted locations are predicted by the terminal based on the ephemeris information.
Sayeed teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
transmitting ephemeris information of the satellite to a terminal… corresponding to predicted locations of the satellite… wherein the assistance information is information calculated by the terminal based on predicted locations of the satellite and the predicted locations are predicted by the terminal based on the ephemeris information (Sayeed discloses a system (Figs. 2-3), where a satellite 110 shares its ephemeris info to UE 102, so that the UE 102 predicts location of the satellite 110 during a time period, thus using the RTTs in Marshall to estimate location of the UE 102. The times being used for the calculations are times considered during a first position and the time lasting until returning to the position, thus being RTTs. [Paragraphs 7-8, 25-26, 32, 35-37, 43]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) for the purpose of minimizing interference (Sayeed – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 2, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the assistance information is a required transmission time (transmission time is part of the assistance info [Paragraphs 38-39, 101]), which is a time difference between an arrival time of a downlink signal transmitted from the satellite to the terminal and a transmission time of an uplink signal in response to the downlink signal (time difference between uplinks and downlinks signals is part of the transmission time of the assistance info [Paragraphs 54, 121]), and in the calculating of the round-trip times based on the assistance information, the satellite calculates the round-trip times using the required transmission times which are the periodically reported assistance information (RTT calculated based on the time difference in the transmissions of the uplinks and downlinks signals [Paragraphs 125, 369]).
Regarding claim 3, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the assistance information is a timing advance ([Paragraph 38]), and in the calculating of the round-trip times based on the assistance information, the satellite calculates the round-trip times using the timing advances which are the periodically reported assistance information (RTT calculated based on the timing advances [Paragraphs 125, 369]).
Regarding claim 4, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the estimating of the location of the terminal using the round trip times comprises:
calculating distances between the terminal and the satellite using the round-trip times (distances calculated using RTT between UE and BS [Paragraphs 125, 369]); and
estimating the location of the terminal based on the distances ([Paragraphs 4, 128]).
Regarding claim 6, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 4, further comprising:
when a plurality of locations are estimated, acquiring a location of another terminal having round trip times closest to the calculated round trip times (second UE is used for the calculation of locations using the RTT [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]); and
obtaining one actual location from the plurality of locations based on the acquired location of the other terminal (then the actual location is determined for each of the UEs[Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]).
Regarding claim 9, Marshall teaches a method of a terminal (Fig. 1), comprising:
[
receiving, from the satellite, a request signal requesting to periodically report assistance information for round-trip time calculation (BS 172 asks UE 112 to frequently report assistance info for RTT [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]), the request signal including a reporting periodicity and a type of assistance information (UE 112 reporting the assistance info to BS 172 [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]);
[
periodically reporting the generated assistance information to the satellite (UE 112 constantly reports the assistance info to BS 172 [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]).
However, Marshall does not explicitly mention: receiving ephemeris information from a satellite… predicting movement locations of the satellite based on the ephemeris information… generating the assistance information according to the request signal based on the predicted locations of the satellite.
Sayeed teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
receiving ephemeris information from a satellite… predicting movement locations of the satellite based on the ephemeris information… generating the assistance information according to the request signal based on the predicted locations of the satellite (Sayeed discloses a system (Figs. 2-3), where a satellite 110 shares its ephemeris info to UE 102, so that the UE 102 predicts location of the satellite 110 during a time period, thus using the RTTs in Marshall to estimate location of the UE 102. The times being used for the calculations are times considered during a first position and the time lasting until returning to the position, thus being RTTs. [Paragraphs 7-8, 25-26, 32, 35-37, 43]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) for the purpose of minimizing interference (Sayeed – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 10, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 9, wherein when the type of assistance information is a required transmission time, the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal comprises:
receiving a downlink signal from the satellite base station (UE receives the DL signals from BS);
calculating an arrival time of the downlink signal (DL TOA is estimated [Paragraphs 54, 121]);
calculating a transmission time of a response signal to the downlink signal (UL TOT is estimated in response to the DL TOA [Paragraphs 54, 121]); and
calculating the required transmission time, which is a time difference between the arrival time and the transmission time, as the assistance information (time difference between uplinks and downlinks signals is part of the transmission time of the assistance info [Paragraphs 54, 121]).
Regarding claim 11, Marshall further teaches the method according to claim 9, wherein when the type of assistance information is a timing advance (TA), the terminal uses a TA with respect to the satellite as the assistance information (RTT calculated based on the timing advances [Paragraphs 125, 369]).
Regarding claim 14, Marshall teaches a terminal comprising a processor (Fig. 1),
wherein the processor causes the terminal to perform ([Paragraph 8]):
[
receiving, from the satellite, a request signal requesting to periodically report assistance information for round-trip time calculation (BS 172 asks UE 112 to frequently report assistance info for RTT [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]), the request signal including a reporting periodicity and a type of assistance information (UE 112 reporting the assistance info to BS 172 [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]);
[
periodically reporting the generated assistance information to the satellite (UE 112 constantly reports the assistance info to BS 172 [Paragraphs 20, 22, 75-77, 94-96, 100, 117-118, 121, 125, 186, 190, 350-351]).
However, Marshall does not explicitly mention: receiving ephemeris information from a satellite… predicting movement locations of the satellite based on the ephemeris information; generating the assistance information according to the request signal based on the predicted locations of the satellite.
Sayeed teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
receiving ephemeris information from a satellite… predicting movement locations of the satellite based on the ephemeris information; generating the assistance information according to the request signal based on the predicted locations of the satellite (Sayeed discloses a system (Figs. 2-3), where a satellite 110 shares its ephemeris info to UE 102, so that the UE 102 predicts location of the satellite 110 during a time period, thus using the RTTs in Marshall to estimate location of the UE 102. The times being used for the calculations are times considered during a first position and the time lasting until returning to the position, thus being RTTs. [Paragraphs 7-8, 25-26, 32, 35-37, 43]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) for the purpose of minimizing interference (Sayeed – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 15, Marshall further teaches the terminal according to claim 14, wherein when the type of assistance information is a required transmission time, in the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal, the processor further causes the terminal to perform:
receiving a downlink signal from the satellite base station (UE receives the DL signals from BS);
calculating an arrival time of the downlink signal (DL TOA is estimated [Paragraphs 54, 121]);
calculating a transmission time of a response signal to the downlink signal (UL TOT is estimated in response to the DL TOA [Paragraphs 54, 121]); and
calculating the required transmission time, which is a time difference between the arrival time and the transmission time, as the assistance information (time difference between uplinks and downlinks signals is part of the transmission time of the assistance info [Paragraphs 54, 121]).
Regarding claim 16, Marshall further teaches the terminal according to claim 14, wherein when the type of assistance information is a timing advance (TA), the terminal uses a TA with respect to the satellite as the assistance information (RTT calculated based on the timing advances [Paragraphs 125, 369]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324111) in view of Sayeed et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0256865) and further in view of Van Diggelen et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0004877).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed teaches all the limitations recited in claim 4.
However, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed does not explicitly mention: when a plurality of locations are estimated, calculating an angle of arrival for an uplink signal transmitted from the terminal; and determining one actual location from the plurality of locations using the calculated angle of arrival.
Van Diggelen teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
when a plurality of locations are estimated, calculating an angle of arrival for an uplink signal transmitted from the terminal; and determining one actual location from the plurality of locations using the calculated angle of arrival (location of the UE is determined based on AOA [Paragraphs 19, 21, 30, 33]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) by using AOA (as taught by Van Diggelen) for the purpose of proper location determination (Van Diggelen – Paragraph 2).
Claims 8, 13, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324111) in view of Sayeed et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0256865) and further in view of Kim et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0049291).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1.
However, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed does not explicitly mention: transmitting information on a virtual location of the satellite to the terminal, wherein the assistance information is information calculated by the terminal based on the information on the virtual location of the satellite.
Kim teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
transmitting information on a virtual location of the satellite to the terminal, wherein the assistance information is information calculated by the terminal based on the information on the virtual location of the satellite (location of the UE is determined based on virtual info [Paragraphs 13-20]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) by using virtual location (as taught by Kim) for the purpose of tracking locations properly (Kim – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed teaches all the limitations recited in claim 9.
However, the combination of Marshall and Sayeed does not explicitly mention: receiving information on a virtual location of the satellite from the satellite, and the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal comprises: identifying the virtual location of the satellite; and generating the assistance information based on the virtual location of the satellite.
Kim teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
receiving information on a virtual location of the satellite from the satellite, and the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal comprises: identifying the virtual location of the satellite; and generating the assistance information based on the virtual location of the satellite (location of the UE is determined based on virtual info [Paragraphs 13-20]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) by using virtual location (as taught by Kim) for the purpose of tracking locations properly (Kim – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 18, Marshall teaches all the limitations recited in claim 14.
However, Marshall does not explicitly mention: receiving information on a virtual location of the satellite from the satellite, and in the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal, the processor further causes the terminal to perform: identifying the virtual location of the satellite; and generating the assistance information based on the virtual location of the satellite.
Kim teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
receiving information on a virtual location of the satellite from the satellite, and in the generating of the assistance information according to the request signal, the processor further causes the terminal to perform: identifying the virtual location of the satellite; and generating the assistance information based on the virtual location of the satellite (location of the UE is determined based on virtual info [Paragraphs 13-20]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Marshall) by sending ephemeris to the UE (as taught by Sayeed) by using virtual location (as taught by Kim) for the purpose of tracking locations properly (Kim – Paragraph 3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5708. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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.
July 3, 2026
/FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights