Detail Action
This office action is a response to an amendment submitted on 06/03/2026.
Claims 1-2, 6-17 and 21- 26 are pending for examination.
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 Amendment
Claims 1, 2, 13 and 16 have been amended.
Claims 3-5 and 18- 20 have been canceled.
Claims 21- 26 have been newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/03/2026 with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
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 1-2, 6-17 and 21- 26 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.
Claims 1 and 16 recites the limitation "(CE) of the TA report” . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It’s unclear “(CE) of the TA report” is referring “a TA report” or “a TA report based on an even trigger”.
Claims -2, 6-17 and 21- 26 are depend on their parent claim 1, thus they are also rejected for the same reasoning.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-2, and 6-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang (US 20240373419 A1), hereinafter “Jiang”; in view of Chin et al. (US 20210250989 A1), hereinafter “Chin” ; and in further view of Jiang2 (US 20200281010 A1), hereinafter “Jiang2”.
Regarding claim 1, Jiang teaches A method for triggering a Scheduling Request (SR), wherein the method is applied to a terminal in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connected state, and comprises [Jiang: Fig. 1; Par. 42 discloses scheduling request triggering for a terminal in NR/NTN system (Par. 3)]:
triggering an SR when a Timing Advance (TA) report is triggered and an uplink resource satisfies an unavailable condition [Jiang: Fig. 1; Par. 71- 75 teaches of TA report triggered the SR in a case that there is no available uplink resource],
PNG
media_image1.png
342
450
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Jiang does not teach the TA report comprises a TA report based on an event trigger, the unavailable condition satisfied by the uplink resource comprises a second condition, the second condition comprises that there is a second uplink resource for a new transmission and the second uplink resource is unable to accommodate a Medium Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) of the TA report, the uplink resource is a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) resource for a new uplink transmission.
Nevertheless, Chin, in the similar field of endeavor teaches the TA report comprises a TA report based on an event trigger, the unavailable condition satisfied by the uplink resource comprises a second condition, the second condition comprises that there is a second uplink resource for a new transmission and the second uplink resource is unable to accommodate a Medium Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) of the TA report [Chin: Fig. 6; Par. 36- 43; 173- 181 teaches when no PUCCH resource is configured/ unavailable condition determine that second resource is available where including MAC CE is transmitted on the second PUSCH resource]. the uplink resource is a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) resource for a new uplink transmission [Chin: Fig. 6; Par. 36- 43; 173- 181]
PNG
media_image2.png
596
360
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Chin for TA report when SR is not capable of carrying the MAC CE. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Chin in the Jiang system in order to provide triggered by a UE whenever certain condition(s) is satisfied transmission on unavailable condition [Chin: Par. 36].
However, Jiang in view of Chin does not teach wherein the method further comprises: when the SR is in a pending state, cancelling the SR when a cancellation condition is satisfied, wherein the cancellation condition comprises the TA report is completed.
Nevertheless, Jiang2, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the method further comprises: when the SR is in a pending state, cancelling the SR when a cancellation condition is satisfied, wherein the cancellation condition comprises the TA report is completed [Jiang2: Figs.1- 2; Par. 91- 94; Par. 41- 50, 87 teaches of trigger SR with PUSCH, and in response to preset RA trigger condition, trigger contention-based request (condition include that no valid uplink resource therefore once valid uplink resource information is detected (new), previous triggered RA procedure is cancelled)].
PNG
media_image3.png
590
550
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Jiang2 for performing SR and RA trigger condition. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Jiang2 in the Jiang/ Chin system in order to provide transmission on unavailable condition [Jiang2: Par. 31].
Regarding claim 2, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Jiang in view of Jiang 2 further teaches wherein the TA report comprises at least one of: a TA report based on a periodicity; a TA report based on an event trigger; or a TA report based on a network request [Jiang: Par. 61 teaches of periodically reporting of TA].
Regarding claim 6, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches further comprising: when the SR is in a pending state triggering a random access procedure when a trigger condition is satisfied [Jiang2: Par. 48 teaches of SR trigger condition is satisfied, SR is in pending state triggering].
Regarding claim 7, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 6. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches there is no Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) resource for transmitting the SR; or a number of transmitting the SR corresponding to the SR has reached a maximum SR transmission number [Jiang2: Figs. 1,2; Par. 42- 52 teaches of no PUCCH for transmitting SR condition].
Regarding claim 8, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 7. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches receiving second configuration information, wherein the second configuration information is used for configuring a SR configuration [Jiang2: Par. 50- 52 teaches of receiving current and new configuration information for SR configuration].
Regarding claim 9, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 8. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches determining a PUCCH resource for transmitting the SR based on the SR configuration; and transmitting the SR through the PUCCH resource [Jiang2: Figs. 1,2; Par. 42- 52 teaches of no PUCCH for transmitting SR condition].
Regarding claim 10, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 8. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches determining that there is no PUCCH resource for transmitting the SR when no SR configuration is configured [Jiang2; Par. 138 SR determination is satisfied if there is no PUCCH to configure].
Regarding claim 11, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 10. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches further comprising, before a random access procedure is ended, stopping the random access procedure when a stopping condition is satisfied [See. Jiang2; Figs. 1, 2].
Regarding claim 12, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches wherein the random access procedure is triggered when there is no PUCCH resource for transmitting the SR [Jiang2; Par. 138 SR determination is satisfied if there is no PUCCH to configure].
Regarding claim 13, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches an uplink scheduling grant is received, and the TA report is transmitted by using an uplink resource scheduled by the uplink scheduling grant [Jiang2: Figs. 1-2; Par. 138- 143 teaches of if there is an available UL-SCH resource received or the UL-grant is configured within the first preset time interval, send to-be-transmitted data and/or the BSR to a base station by using the available UL-SCH resource or an uplink transmission resource indicated by the UL-grant].
Regarding claim 14, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 13. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches an uplink scheduling grant is received, and the uplink scheduling grant is not indicated in a message 2 or a message B, the terminal transmits a Medium Access Control Protocol Data Unit (MAC PDU) using the uplink scheduling grant, and the MAC PDU comprises a medium access control element (MAC CE) of the TA report [Jiang: Par. 51, 214 teaches of transmit MAC PDU containing in TA report].
Regarding claim 15, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 further teaches wherein the method is applied to a Non Terrestrial Network (NTN) scenario [Jiang: Par. 3].
Regarding claim 16, Jiang teaches A terminal, comprising:
a processor; a transceiver; and a memory which is configured for storing executable instructions of the processor and is coupled to the processor, wherein the processor is configured to load and execute the executable instructions to[Jiang: Fig. 1 illustrates scheduling request triggering for a terminal in NR/NTN system (Par. 3)]:
trigger an SR when a Timing Advance (TA) report is triggered and an uplink resource satisfies an unavailable condition [Jiang: Fig. 1; Par. 71- 75 teaches of TA report triggered the SR in a case that there is no available uplink resource],
PNG
media_image1.png
342
450
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Jiang does not teach the TA report comprises a TA report based on an event trigger, the unavailable condition satisfied by the uplink resource comprises a second condition, the second condition comprises that there is a second uplink resource for a new transmission and the second uplink resource is unable to accommodate a Medium Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) of the TA report, the uplink resource is a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) resource for a new uplink transmission.
Nevertheless, Chin, in the similar field of endeavor teaches the TA report comprises a TA report based on an event trigger, the unavailable condition satisfied by the uplink resource comprises a second condition, the second condition comprises that there is a second uplink resource for a new transmission and the second uplink resource is unable to accommodate a Medium Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) of the TA report [Chin: Fig. 6; Par. 36- 43; 173- 181 teaches when no PUCCH resource is configured/ unavailable condition determine that second resource is available where including MAC CE is transmitted on the second PUSCH resource]. the uplink resource is a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) resource for a new uplink transmission [Chin: Fig. 6; Par. 36- 43; 173- 181]
PNG
media_image2.png
596
360
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Chin for TA report when SR is not capable of carrying the MAC CE. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Chin in the Jiang system in order to provide triggered by a UE whenever certain condition(s) is satisfied transmission on unavailable condition [Chin: Par. 36].
However, Jiang in view of Chin does not teach wherein the method further comprises: when the SR is in a pending state, cancelling the SR when a cancellation condition is satisfied, wherein the cancellation condition comprises the TA report is completed.
Nevertheless, Jiang2, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the method further comprises: when the SR is in a pending state, cancelling the SR when a cancellation condition is satisfied, wherein the cancellation condition comprises the TA report is completed [Jiang2: Figs.1- 2; Par. 91- 94; Par. 41- 50, 87 teaches of trigger SR with PUSCH, and in response to preset RA trigger condition, trigger contention-based request (condition include that no valid uplink resource therefore once valid uplink resource information is detected (new), previous triggered RA procedure is cancelled)].
PNG
media_image3.png
590
550
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Jiang2 for performing SR and RA trigger condition. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Jiang2 in the Jiang/ Chin system in order to provide transmission on unavailable condition [Jiang2: Par. 31].
Regarding claim 17, the combined Jiang/Chin in view of JIang2 teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 16. Jiang in view of Jiang 2 further teaches wherein the TA report comprises at least one of: a TA report based on a periodicity; a TA report based on an event trigger; or a TA report based on a network request [Jiang: Par. 61 teaches of periodically reporting of TA].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21- 26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowable subject matter:
A full search was conducted and the features of the instant Claims 21-26 were not found to be in any reasonable combination of the closest prior art in combination of Jiang/Chin/Jiang2 system.
With respect to exemplary, the prior arts in above teach of method and devices for TA reporting with SR even triggering under unavailable condition [Jiang: Figs. 1-10; Par. 30- 57] and using second uplink resource for a new transmission [Chin: Par. 30- 45] where in PUSCH resource are for new uplink transmission [Jiang2: Par. 41- 50].
However, the combined Jiang/ Chin/ Jiang2 system does not disclose, suggest or render obvious the limitations of the instant claims 21, 23-25 reciting;
“wherein the stopping condition comprises that: a reconfiguration signaling for reconfiguring an offset parameter koffseis received; or a reconfiguration signaling for reconfiguring the offset parameter koffser is received, and a difference between the offset parameter koffser and a TA is greater than or equal to a third threshold”
Moreover, the combined Jiang/ Chin/ Jiang2 system does not disclose, suggest or render obvious the limitations of the instant claims 22 and 26 reciting;
“receiving first configuration information, wherein the first configuration information is used for configuring an SR identity (SR ID) corresponding to the TA report, and the SR ID is an ID corresponding to a SR configuration”
Therefore, Claims 21- 26 are indicated as containing allowable subject matter and allowed over the closest Prior Art references.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights