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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 03/22/2024, and 05/22/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 14, 33-34, 36-38, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maattanen et al. (EP 4451757 A2), hereinafter Maattanen.
Re. Claim 1, Maattanen teaches a method for wireless communication, comprising: transmitting, by a wireless device, to a network node, a first information including a timing advance (TA) of the wireless device using a signaling layer configured to carry data or control information between the wireless device and the network node (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5 - The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE), wherein the first information is transmitted based on a triggering event upon which the wireless device performs a transmission of the first information (Pg. 5, Paragraph 3 - The method further comprises receiving, from the UE, a connection request including a timing advance, a frequency offset, or both, according to the indication. Pg. 25, Paragraph 1 - For instance, a [wireless device] may be designed to transmit information to a network on a predetermined schedule, when triggered by an internal or external event, or in response to requests from the network), wherein the TA is transmitted using a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5- The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE).
Re. Claim 36, Maattanen teaches a method for wireless communication, comprising: receiving, at a network node, from a wireless device (Fig. 1, Examiner interprets that the image showing the UE transmitting to a network node implies that the process described within Maattanen’s disclosure includes receiving as well as transmitting), a first information including a timing advance (TA) of the wireless device using a signaling layer configured to carry data or control information between the wireless device and the network node (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5 - The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE), wherein the first information is transmitted based on a triggering event upon which the wireless device performs a transmission of the first information (Pg. 12, Paragraph 25- For instance, a [wireless device] may be designed to transmit information to a network on a predetermined schedule, when triggered by an internal or external event, or in response to requests from the network), wherein the TA is transmitted using a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5 - The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE).
Re. Claims 5 and 37, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
Additionally, Maattanen further teaches wherein the signaling layer is configured to perform a communication using a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5 - The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE).
Re. Claims 8 and 38, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
Additionally, Maattanen further teaches wherein the triggering event includes an event that a differential timing advance of the wireless device exceeds a threshold value for triggering a transmission of the first timing pre-compensation information by the wireless device (Pg. 12, Paragraph 6 - consider LEO cell where both differential delay and differential Doppler are large. In this case, the network may require the UE 25 to send both timing advance and frequency advance that it applied for MSG1 transmission).
Re. Claims 14 and 40, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
Additionally, Maattanen further teaches wherein the MAC CE is identified by a logical channel identifier (LCID) of a logical channel (LCH) (Pg. 10, Paragraph 6 - The timing and frequency adjustment MAC CE is identified by a MAC subheader with LCID)
Re. Claim 33, Maattanen teaches Claim 1.
Additionally, Maattanen further teaches wherein, upon transmitting the first information including the TA, the MAC CE includes reserved bits set as zero and the TA (Fig. 5 & 6, & Pg. 10, Paragraph 6 - if two C bits are used, the values 00, 01, 10 respectively indicate i) both TA and FA commands, ii) only TA command, or iii) only FA command to be present).
Re. Claim 34, Maattanen teaches Claim 33.
Additionally, Maattanen further teaches wherein the TA is reported using units at slot level (Pg. 12, Paragraph 5 - The timing advance and/or frequency advance can be reported by UE 25 sending the MAC CE described above with command values know both to the network and UE).
Re. Claim 44, Claim 44 is a combinatorial claim that covers the same material as both claims 33 and 34, which have been rejected under Maattanen above. Claim 44, is rejected under the same means.
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 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.
Claims 9 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Dinan, Esmael (2023/032792), hereinafter Dinan.
Re. Claims 9 and 39, Maattanen teaches Claims 8 and 38.
However, Maattanen does not expressly teach wherein the differential timing advance includes a difference between a current timing advance being used by the wireless device and a last timing advance value reported by the wireless device.
Yet, Dinan explicitly teaches wherein the differential timing advance includes a difference between a current timing advance being used by the wireless device and a last timing advance value reported by the wireless device (¶0188 - The UE may apply the TA value of zero for the initial transmission. The eNB may, upon reception of the uplink signals, calculate the difference in needed uplink reception timing and the actual reception timing of the uplink signals. This difference may be indicated in the Timing Advance Command (TAC) which is sent to the UE);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Dinan to the teaching of Maattanen. The motivation for such would be in order to improve efficiency in transmission by specifying the timing used when reporting the timing advance as Dinan provides that the differential timing is a difference between the current timing and a previous timing (¶0188, Dinan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 30 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Cirik et al. (2024/0324046), hereinafter Cirik.
Re. Claims 30 and 41, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
However, Maattanen does not expressly teach wherein the MAC CE has a priority below a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) MAC CE or uplink (UL)-common control channel (CCCH) data in a logical channel prioritization procedure.
Yet, Cirik explicitly wherein the MAC CE has a priority below a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) MAC CE or uplink (UL)-common control channel (CCCH) data in a logical channel prioritization procedure (¶0332 - Logical channels may be prioritized, for example, in accordance with the following order (highest priority listed first): BFR MAC CE, C-RNTI MAC CE or data from UL-CCCH, Configured Grant Confirmation MAC CE, and MAC CE for BSR, with exception of BSR included for padding. The wireless device may include (e.g., send) the BFR MAC CE first, C-RNTI MAC CE or data from UL-CCCH second, and/or Configured Grant Confirmation MAC CE third (e.g., to a MAC PDU), for example, after or in response to receiving and/or determining (e.g., having) an uplink grant for an uplink transmission (e.g., a MAC PDU transmission)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Cirik to the teaching of Maattanen. The motivation for such would be in order to improve efficiency in transmission by setting a specific priority between logical channels as Cirik provides a priority between logical channels (¶0332, Cirik). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 31-32 and 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Babaei et al. (2024/0007888), hereinafter Babaei.
Re. Claims 31 and 42, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
Yet, Maattanen does not expressly teach wherein the MAC CE is octet-aligned.
However, Babaei expressly teaches wherein the MAC CE is octet-aligned (¶0606 - In an example, the Timing Advance Command MAC CE may have a fixed size and may comprise an octet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Babaei to the teaching of Maattanen. The motivation for such would be in order to improve efficiency in transmission by specifying the parameters of the MAC as Babaei provides an octet-aligned and fixed-size MAC CE (¶0606, Babaei). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 32 and 43, Maattanen teaches Claims 1 and 36.
Yet, Maattanen does not expressly teach wherein the MAC CE is fixed-sized.
However, Babaei expressly teaches wherein the MAC CE is fixed-sized (¶0606 - In an example, the Timing Advance Command MAC CE may have a fixed size and may comprise an octet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Babaei to the teaching of Maattanen. The motivation for such would be in order to improve efficiency in transmission by specifying the parameters of the MAC as Babaei provides an octet-aligned and fixed-size MAC CE (¶0606, Babaei). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Kim, Donggun (2024/0414772), hereinafter Kim.
Re. Claim 35, Maattanen teaches Claim 1.
However, Maattanen does not expressly teach the method further comprising: generating, by the wireless device, data related to the TA in a case that there is an available uplink (UL) resource; or triggering, by the wireless device, a scheduling request (SR) procedure to request a resource for reporting the TA in a case that there is no available UL resource.
Yet, Kim explicitly teaches the method further comprising: generating, by the wireless device, data related to the TA in a case that there is an available uplink (UL) resource; OR triggering, by the wireless device, a scheduling request (SR) procedure to request a resource for reporting the TA in a case that there is no available UL resource (¶0286 - may include a timing advance (TA) value (or offset value) for synchronizing the base station's downlink signal or the base station's uplink signal, or a time alignment timer (TAT) indicating the validity of the TA value, or a TAT value, or may include measurement object synchronization signal block (SSB) configuration information or channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) configuration information or reference signal (RS) configuration information or transmission resource information (for example, PUCCH configuration information (for example, scheduling request (SR) information or specific transmission resource) or frequency transmission resource or time transmission resource) which may be used to report the result when a beam failure occurs. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Kim to the teaching of Maattanen. The motivation for such would be in order to improve efficiency in transmission by triggering a scheduling request if there is no available UL as Kim provides a procedure to request via a scheduling request for a TA if there is no available uplink (¶0286, Kim). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tseng et al. (2023/0102742) - ¶0010-0043
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights