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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 10, 13, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gude et al. (12,207,293) in view of Seidel et al. (2023/0,180,301).
For claims 1, 13, Gude teaches a method and system (abstract, background, summary and claims; col. 3, line 50 – col. 4, line 50) of a wireless (col. 4, lines 50-65) satellite (col. 5, line 60 – col. 6, line 20) base station (col. 6, lines 20-55), comprising:
receiving, by the wireless satellite base station, a plurality of radio resource requests (col. 12, lines 20-40) from a plurality of wireless devices (col. 16, lines 50-65 in view of col. 6, lines 50-55; resources are scheduled so the request is to schedule resources) corresponding with preambles (col. 19, lines 15-40; PRACH preambles) received during an access window (col. 19, line 60 – col. 20, line 10; RAR window; col. 23, lines 40-55);
forming, by the wireless satellite base station, a multicast group from the plurality of wireless devices (col. 17, lines 45-65; groupcasting) based on a timing of receiving the radio resource requests (col. 9, lines 30-55; col 17, line 45 – col. 18, line 10), and a type of response (col. 15, lines 35-55); and
multicasting, by the wireless satellite base station, a multicast message with a response to the plurality of radio resource requests to the wireless devices of the multicast group (col. 15, lines 35-55).
Gude does not expressly disclose that timing of each radio resource request is based on a timing of the access window utilized by a corresponding preamble. Seidel teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) that includes forming, by the wireless satellite base station, a multicast group from the plurality of wireless devices (Para 109-123, 251) based on a timing of receiving the radio resource requests (Paras 69, 74-75), and a type of response, wherein timing of each radio resource request is based on a timing of the access window utilized by a corresponding preamble (Paras 59-61). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Seidel in order to provide improvements to multicasting in satellite/NTN systems (Paras 8-11).
For claims 4, 16, Gude teaches further comprising:
collecting, by the wireless satellite base station, responses for each of the plurality of wireless devices (col. 9, lines 5-65);
wherein the responses include a collection of responses (col. 19, line 50 – col. 20, line 10) from a core network (col. 7, lines 20-35) or a third party application (col. 9, line 65 – col. 10, line 15).
For claim 5, Gude teaches a buffer but not its usage (col. 27, lines 45-55). Seidel teaches further comprising initiating based on the preambles, buffering of the collection of responses, wherein a content of the response come from multiple sources for multiple wireless devices (Paras 249, 323, 566).
For claims 6, 17, Gude teaches that the multicast message includes wireless device identifiers that indicate that the multicast message includes a response for wireless devices corresponding with the wireless device identifiers (col. 17, line 45 – col. 19, line 40).
For claims 7, 18, Gude does not expressly disclose stratum messaging. Seidel teaches further comprising:
detecting, by the wireless satellite base station, a response received from a core network as a non-access stratum message received from a core network (Paras 122, 245);
compressing or eliminating the response received from the core network, by the wireless satellite base station, in the formed multicast message if the non-access stratum message is detected as a service accept message (Paras 645-650).
For claim 10, Seidel teaches that one or more of the plurality of radio resource requests received from the wireless devices include an establishment cause, and further comprising:
dividing, by the wireless satellite base station, the plurality of wireless devices into different classes of service (Para 257); and
multicasting, by the wireless satellite base station, multicast messages having a response time dependent on a level of class of service of each of the plurality of wireless devices (Para 259).
Claim(s) 2, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gude and Seidel as applied to claims 1, 13 above, and further in view of Dashtaki et al. (12,490,310).
For claims 2, 14, Gude and Seidel do not expressly disclose attempting, by each of the wireless devices, reception of a multicast grant for a user period of time after transmitting a preamble. Dashtaki teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims; col. 2, line 35 – col. 5, line 5) that includes this limitation (col. 19, lines 50-65; col. 72, line 50 – col. 73, line 30). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Dashtaki in order to provide improvements to mobility messaging (col. 14, line 50 – col. 15, line 5).
For claim 11, Dashtaki teaches further comprising:
compressing (col. 9, lines 45-60) and consolidating, by the wireless satellite base station (col. 43, lines 15-65), the multicast message for multiple of the plurality of wireless devices (col. 28, lines 25-50);
multicasting, by the wireless satellite base station, the compressed and consolidated multicast message (col. 11, lines 5-20).
Claim(s) 3, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gude and Seidel and Dashtaki as applied to claims 1, 2, 13, 14 above, and further in view of He et al. (12,289,767).
For claims 3, 15, Gude and other art does not expressly disclose the particular limitations. He teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) wherein multiple access windows are mapped to a single multicast grant (col. 11, line 65 – col. 12, line 45) within the user period of time (col. 10, lines 5-35), wherein a number of the multiple access windows (col. 7, lines 20-50) mapped to the single multicast grant (col. 8, lines 10-60) is adaptively selected (col. 9, line 40 – col. 10, line 5) based on a level of network traffic (col. 6, lines 20-50). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added He in order to provide improvements to the RACH procedures (col. 1, line 40 – col. 2, line 45).
Claim(s) 8-9, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gude and Seidel as applied to claims 1, 13 above, and further in view of Jeon et al. (11,412,550).
For claims 8, 19, Gude and Seidel do not expressly disclose the limitations. Jeon teaches a method and system (abstract) further comprising:
communicating, by the wireless satellite base station, messages received from the plurality of wireless devices to a core network (col. 6, lines 40-50); and
routing, by the core network, the messages received from different of the plurality of wireless devices (col. 5, line 60 – col. 6, line 40) to different 3rd party applications (col. 7, lines 30-55; col. 9, line 50 – col. 10, line 10).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Jeon in order to provide improvements to better messaging and configuration (col. 11, lines 15-50).
For claims 9, 20, Gude teaches utilizing, by the core network, dedicated signaling protocols (col. 12, lines 5-40) to ensure faster acknowledgement of specific messages received from the 3rd party application and providing the faster acknowledgements as a response to the base station (col. 17, lines 5-40).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gude and Seidel as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (10,979,183).
For claim 12, Gude and Seidel do not expressly disclose the limitations. Wang teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) further comprising:
receiving by the wireless device, a request to respond in the multicast message (col. 24, line 50 – col. 25, line 20); and
responding, by the wireless device, to the satellite base station with an acknowledgement based on the multicast message (col. 25, line 20 – 60).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Wang in order to provide improvements to message acknowledgements (col. 1, lines 15-45).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELVIN H POLLACK whose telephone number is (571)272-3887. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571)270-1684. 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.
/MELVIN H POLLACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445