DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/05/2026 has been entered.
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 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 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, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17, 19, 22-23, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nokia (NOKIA et al., ‘Discussion on 5GS time synchronization status report towards the UE(s)’, R2-2211777 3GPP TSG-RANWG2 Meeting #120, November 4, 2022, Toulouse, France.) IDS submitted by Applicant in view of Chandramoul et al (US 2025/0212142 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Nokia teaches a method/user equipment (UE) performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (Abstract), the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, a system information block (SIB) information including a first reference identification (ID) that indicates a status change to the UE (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the gNB, the gNB transmits a report ID in SIB9; This RAN time synchronization status report is generated at the gNB when a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery));
determining whether to perform a transition of a radio resource control (RRC) state based on the first reference ID and a second reference ID, wherein the second reference ID is stored in the UB; and performing the transition of RRC state to an RRC connected state, wherein the first reference ID is related to time synchronization status (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the gNB, the gNB transmits a report ID in SIB9; This RAN time synchronization status report is generated at the gNB when a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery); The UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID; With alternative 1.a the UE needs to move to RRC_CONNECTED, if the UE is able to recognize the type of event the gNB is notifying from the report ID (e.g., the gNB is in holdover but still within holdover specification, so it is accurate enough, or the gNB is in holdover but outside of the holdover specification, or the gNB is locked again with its primary reference clock), then the UE can determine how urgent it is to reconnect with the gNB to retrieve the RAN time synchronization status; i.e. the new status report reads on the first reference ID and since there is a new status report, there would have been a prior status report, which would read on the second reference ID); and
wherein the status change is associated with a synchronization error budget (Sec. 2; With alternative 1.a the UE needs to move to RRC_CONNECTED, if the UE is able to recognize the type of event the gNB is notifying from the report ID (e.g., the gNB is in holdover but still within holdover specification, so it is accurate enough, or the gNB is in holdover but outside of the holdover specification, or the gNB is locked again with its primary reference clock), then the UE can determine how urgent it is to reconnect with the gNB to retrieve the RAN time synchronization status; i.e. the accuracy reads on the error budget).
However, while Nokia teaches the UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID, which strongly suggest that the UE would need to compare the prior report ID to the new report ID since it is determining that there is a new status report based on the report ID (Sec. 2), he does not specifically disclose a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to; and in case that the first reference ID and the second reference ID are different.
Chandramoul teaches providing means for determining user equipment impacted by a network timing synchronization status and providing timing resiliency solutions (Abstract). He further teaches a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to (Para. 0065):
and in case that the first reference ID and the second reference ID are different (Para. 0098; if the UE has more than one time reference, it can use them to compare the time signals and determine if its primary time source is degrading, failing, or have recovered; i.e. time signals would read on the reference IDs and Nokia shows that the status report is sent based on a status change such as a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Chandramoul with the teachings as in Nokia. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide high data throughput in order to realize various services (Chandramoul at para. 0004).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches wherein the first reference ID includes information on an event (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the gNB, the gNB transmits a report ID in SIB9; This RAN time synchronization status report is generated at the gNB when a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery)).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Nokia teaches a method/base station performed by a base station in a wireless communication system (Abstract), the method comprising:
receiving, from an access and management function (AMF) a request including a synchronization error budget associated with a request of a time sensitive communication and time synchronization function (TSCTSF) (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the TSCTSF, the TSCTSF may cipher it, and provide it to the gNB via AMF. The gNB broadcasts the ciphered RAN time synchronization status report in SIB; With alternative 1.a the UE needs to move to RRC_CONNECTED, if the UE is able to recognize the type of event the gNB is notifying from the report ID (e.g., the gNB is in holdover but still within holdover specification, so it is accurate enough, or the gNB is in holdover but outside of the holdover specification, or the gNB is locked again with its primary reference clock), then the UE can determine how urgent it is to reconnect with the gNB to retrieve the RAN time synchronization status; i.e. the accuracy reads on the error budget); and
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a system information block (SIB) information including a first reference identification (ID) that indicates a status change to the UE (Sec. 2; The UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the TSCTSF, the TSCTSF may cipher it, and provide it to the gNB via AMF. The gNB broadcasts the ciphered RAN time synchronization status report in SIB; This RAN time synchronization status report is generated at the gNB when a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery)) and
wherein the status change is associated with a synchronization error budget (Sec. 2; With alternative 1.a the UE needs to move to RRC_CONNECTED, if the UE is able to recognize the type of event the gNB is notifying from the report ID (e.g., the gNB is in holdover but still within holdover specification, so it is accurate enough, or the gNB is in holdover but outside of the holdover specification, or the gNB is locked again with its primary reference clock), then the UE can determine how urgent it is to reconnect with the gNB to retrieve the RAN time synchronization status; i.e. the accuracy reads on the error budget).
However, while Nokia teaches the UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID, which strongly suggest that the UE would need to compare the prior report ID to the new report ID since it is determining that there is a new status report based on the report ID (Sec. 2), he does not specifically disclose a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to; and wherein the first reference ID is different from the second reference ID stored in the UE.
Chandramoul teaches providing means for determining user equipment impacted by a network timing synchronization status and providing timing resiliency solutions (Abstract). He further teaches a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to (Para. 0065): and wherein the first reference ID is different from the second reference ID stored in the UE (Para. 0098; if the UE has more than one time reference, it can use them to compare the time signals and determine if its primary time source is degrading, failing, or have recovered; i.e. time signals would read on the reference IDs and Nokia shows that the status report is sent based on a status change such as a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Chandramoul with the teachings as in Nokia. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide high data throughput in order to realize various services (Chandramoul at para. 0004).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches wherein the first reference ID includes information on an event (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the gNB, the gNB transmits a report ID in SIB9; This RAN time synchronization status report is generated at the gNB when a primary source event occurs (e.g., degradation, failure, recovery)).
Regarding claims 22 and 28, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches further comprising: connecting to a network in case it is determined that the first reference ID and the second reference ID are different (Sec. 2; The UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID).
Regarding claims 23 and 29, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches further comprising: receiving, from the base station, information related to the time synchronization status via RRC signaling (Sec. 2; The UE can actively retrieve the RAN timing synchronization status information from the network by entering RRC_CONNECTED when the UE determines there is a new RAN timing synchronization status report available based on the report ID).
Claims 25-26 and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nokia (NOKIA et al., ‘Discussion on 5GS time synchronization status report towards the UE(s)’, R2-2211777 3GPP TSG-RANWG2 Meeting #120, November 4, 2022, Toulouse, France.) IDS submitted by Applicant in view of Chandramoul et al (US 2025/0212142 A1) further in view of Shi et al (US 2025/0056454 A1).
Regarding claims 25 and 31, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches wherein the synchronization error budget is provided by a time sensitive communication and time synchronization function (TSCTSF) to the AMF (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the TSCTSF, the TSCTSF may cipher it, and provide it to the gNB via AMF. The gNB broadcasts the ciphered RAN time synchronization status report in SIB).
However, while Chandramoul teaches the network entities may be a PCF (Para. 0105), he does not specifically disclose via a policy control function (PCF).
Shi teaches a request for one or more timing advance (TA) measurements for a user equipment (UE) with respect to one or more cells served by the DU (Abstract). He further teaches via a policy control function (PCF) (Fig. 3; Para. 0073; Fig. 3 shows the control plane going through the PCF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Shi with the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide improvements to PD compensation in the CU-DU split node architecture (Shi at para. 0012).
Regarding claims 26 and 32, the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul teach the limitations of the previous claims. Nokia further teaches wherein the synchronization error budget is provided by a time sensitive communication and time synchronization function (TSCTSF) to the AMF (Sec. 2; when a new RAN time synchronization status report is available at the TSCTSF, the TSCTSF may cipher it, and provide it to the gNB via AMF. The gNB broadcasts the ciphered RAN time synchronization status report in SIB).
However, while Chandramoul teaches the network entities may be a PCF (Para. 0105), he does not specifically disclose via a policy control function (PCF).
Shi teaches a request for one or more timing advance (TA) measurements for a user equipment (UE) with respect to one or more cells served by the DU (Abstract). He further teaches via a policy control function (PCF) (Fig. 3; Para. 0073; Fig. 3 shows the control plane going through the PCF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Shi with the combination of references Nokia and Chandramoul. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide improvements to PD compensation in the CU-DU split node architecture (Shi at para. 0012).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENT KRUEGER whose telephone number is (303)297-4238. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00 MT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached on (571) 272-2832. 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. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KENT KRUEGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights