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 .
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0330191) in view of Hu et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0093522).
Regarding claim 1, Shin teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (Figs. 7B, 12), the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, a first system information block (SIB) associated with satellite assistance information (UE receives, via SIB, satellite assistance info from BS [Paragraphs 9-10, 172-173, 179-180, 185-186, 220]), the first SIB including first information on serving cell ephemeris (the assistance info comprises info about serving cell ephemeris [Paragraphs 171-172, 220]) and second information on a validity duration of the serving cell ephemeris (the assistance info also comprises duration period of the cell ephemeris [Paragraph 178, 182]); and
receiving, from the base station, a second system information block (SIB) associated with neighbor satellite information based on a first timer with a duration of the validity duration of the serving cell ephemeris (the UE also receives from the BS, via SIB, secondary info about neighbor satellite; where the secondary info comprises a first timer that lasts as the duration of the ephemeris of the serving cell [Paragraph 220, 231, 246]) and a second timer (the secondary info also comprises a second timer [Paragraphs 189, 191]) [(the secondary info, via the SIB, comprises ephemeris of the second cell [Paragraphs 182, 191, 220]).
However, Shin does not explicitly mention: [second timer] for an acquisition of the first SIB before a radio link failure (RLF).
Hu teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
[second timer] for an acquisition of the first SIB before a radio link failure (RLF) (it is being disclosed that, information on cell ephemeris comprises a timer for acquisition of the SIB before RLF takes place. Hence, a person having ordinary skills in the art would recognize that similar process takes places on second timer of the primary reference Shin [Paragraphs 4, 198, 274]).
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 Shin) by acquiring SIB before RLF (as taught by Hu) for the purpose of properly reading data included in the SIBs (Hu – Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 2, Shin further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a validity duration of the neighbor cell ephemeris is same as the validity duration of the serving cell ephemeris (duration of the timers for first and second cells are the same [Paragraph 180]).
Regarding claim 3, Shin further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a validity duration of the neighbor cell ephemeris is identified based on the second timer (secondary ephemeris’ duration is established based on the second timer [Paragraph 182]).
Regarding claim 4, Shin further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a validity duration of the neighbor cell ephemeris is explicitly signaled (secondary ephemeris’ duration is explicitly signaled and established [Paragraph 183]).
Regarding claims 5-8, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1-4.
Regarding claims 9-12, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1-4.
Regarding claims 13-16, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1-4.
Regarding claims 17-20, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1-4.
Conclusion
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.
April 3, 2026
/FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights