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 § 112
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 4, 12, 19, and 24 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
For Claims 4, 12, 19, and 24, it is not clear how “a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload indicates a type of restriction” can be a member of a list of restrictions (this is not itself a restriction).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8-9, 11-12, 15-16, 18-19, 23-24, 26 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tang et al. (US 2025/0039715; this is the US application corresponding to D1 (W02023/132783) from the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority).
For Claims 1 and 16, Tang teaches a method and an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (see paragraphs 285 and 289), configured to cause the UE to:
receive, via a non-anchor cell in a multi-carrier operation, a synchronization signal block (SSB), wherein the SSB is a cell defining SSB (CD-SSB) or a non-cell-defining SSB (NCD-SSB) (see paragraphs 101, 127); and
initiate a procedure based at least in part on the SSB (see paragraphs 147-150, 151-154: measuring cell 2).
For Claims 9 and 24, Tang teaches a method and an apparatus for wireless communication at a network node, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (see paragraphs 299-300, 302), configured to cause the network node to:
transmit, via a non-anchor cell in a multi-carrier operation, a synchronization signal block (SSB), wherein the SSB is a cell defining SSB (CD-SSB) or a non-cell-defining SSB (NCD-SSB) (see paragraphs 101, 127); and
perform signaling associated with a procedure based at least in part on the SSB (see paragraphs 147-150, 151-154: measuring cell 2).
For Claims 3, 11, 18, and 26, Tang teaches the apparatus, wherein the UE is configured to receive either CD-SSBs or NCD-SSBs via the non-anchor cell (see Claim 13, paragraphs 101, 127, 135, 142-144).
For Claims 4, 12, 19, and 24, Tang teaches the apparatus, wherein the UE is configured to receive either CD-SSBs or NCD-SSBs via the non-anchor cell with a restriction, wherein the restriction is associated with no system information block type 1 (SIB1) transmission regardless of SSB type (see paragraph 204), no random access channel (RACH) signaling regardless of the SSB type, or a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload indicates a type of restriction (see paragraph 19: PBCH parameters indicative of restriction).
For Claims 8, 15, 23, and 30, Tang teaches the apparatus, wherein the procedure is associated with one of: an initial access, radio link management, radio resource management, beam failure detection, or quasi co-location (see paragraphs 22, 147-154: RRM measurements).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 10, 17, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (US 2025/0039715; this is the US application corresponding to D1 (W02023/132783) from the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority) as applied to claims 1, 9, 16, and 24 above, and further in view of CN 117676818 A (D2 from the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority).
For Claims 2, 10, 17, and 25, while Tang does indicate that MCD-SSBs and CD-SSBs are alternatively received via the non-anchor cell (see claim 13), Tang as applied above is not explicit as to, but D2 teaches the apparatus, wherein the UE is configured to receive only NCD-SSBs and not CD-SSBs via the non-anchor cell (see p. 14 lines 24-25, p. 9 lines 1-4 as indicated in the Written Opinion).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use only NCD-SSBs as in D2 when implementing the apparatus of Tang. The motivation would be to improve measurement accuracy by supporting an expanded range of signal measurement.
Claim(s) 5, 13, 20, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (US 2025/0039715; this is the US application corresponding to D1 (W02023/132783) from the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority) as applied to claims 1, 9, 16, and 24 above, and further in view of Akkarakaran et al. (US 2022/0264477).
For Claims 5, 13, 20, and 28, Tang further teaches the apparatus, wherein the SSB is received based at least in part on a synchronization raster regardless of whether the SSB is the CD-SSB or the NCD-SSB (see paragraphs 23-24: raster).
Tang as applied above is not explicit as to, but Akkarakaran teaches the one or more processors being further configured to cause the UE to:
receive a master information block (MIB) that includes a flag to indicate that associated system information is provided in another cell (see paragraph 110); and
perform a random access channel (RACH) procedure based at least in part on the SSB transmitted using the synchronization raster (see paragraph 110).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to provide signaling as in Akkarakaran when implementing the apparatus of Tang. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of allowing a low power UE to establish an appropriate connection to the network.
Claim(s) 6-7, 14, 21-22, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (US 2025/0039715; this is the US application corresponding to D1 (W02023/132783) from the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority) as applied to claims 1, 9, 16, and 24 above, and further in view of Han (EP4432735 A1).
For Claims 6, 14, 21, and 29, Tang as applied above is not explicit as to, but Han teaches the apparatus, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to:
receive a master information block (MIB) that includes a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) configuration system information block type 1 (pdcch-ConfigSIB1) field to indicate a global synchronization channel number (GSCN) that has a control resource set 0 (CORESET0) for an associated Type0 PDCCH common search space (CSS) set, wherein system information for the non-anchor cell is identified based at least in part on the GSCN (see paragraphs 4, 5, 195-100: SSBs on sync rasters, include MIB, flag, CORESET0, PDCCH config SIB1, SearchSpace0).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to employ the MIB as in Han when implementing the apparatus of Tang. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using known signaling to convey known information and allowing for compatibility with established networks.
For Claims 7, 14, 22, and 29, Tang as applied above is not explicit as to, but Han teaches the apparatus, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to:
determine the GSCN of a synchronization signal or physical broadcast channel (SS/PBCH) block having the CORESET0 for the associated Type0 PDCCH CSS set based at least in part on repurposed bits in the pdcch-ConfigSIB1 field (see paragraphs 4-5, 75-76, and 195-100).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to employ the MIB as in Han when implementing the apparatus of Tang. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using known signaling to convey known information and allowing for compatibility with established networks.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hong et al. (US 2025/0106794) teaches detecting sync rasters for primary and secondary cells. Huang et al. (US 2023/0354158) teaches signaling for NCD-SSBs. Cui et al. (US 2025/0254636) teaches measuring a neighbor cell using NCD-SSB.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSANDRA L DECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3946. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 4:00 pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/CASSANDRA L DECKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2466 2/20/2026
/FARUK HAMZA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466