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
The amendment filed January 30, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, and 5-20 pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pp. 12 and 13 of Applicant’s response, Applicant argues that Damnjanovic ‘243 fails to teach “receiving system information block (SIB) information of one or more second cells transmitted by a first cell,” “obtaining time and frequency synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell,” and “wherein the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell is/are carried by a system broadcast message of the first cell or a dedicated RRC message” of claim 1. Examiner disagrees.
While Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches the dormant eNB 702 (i.e., second cell) transmits 704 sparse overhead signals on overhead channels, which include a primary synchronization signal (PSS), secondary synchronization signal (SSS) (i.e., reference signal(s) of the second cell), and system information blocks (SIBs), the UE 701 (i.e., the apparatus) acquires (i.e., receives) parameters (i.e., information) for overhead channels of the dormant eNB 702 (i.e., second cell) from the active eNB 703 (i.e., first cell). See ¶¶ [0055] and [0059]. Since the overhead channels includes the SIB of the second cell, the parameters (information) for these overhead channels received from the first cell, is information for the SIB of the second cell received from the first cell, which, under BRI of claim 1, teaches “system information block (SIB) information of one or more second cells transmitted by a first cell” as recited in claim 1. (Emphasis added). Therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches that the apparatus is “receiving system information block (SIB) information of one or more second cells transmitted by a first cell” of claim 1. (Emphasis added).
Furthermore, Damnjanovic ‘243 also discloses “[t]he dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS, SSS, CRS, MIB, and system information (SI) in SI blocks (SIBs) in N ms bursts every M ms with L ms offset. The values for N, M, and L may be configured by the active eNB 703 [the first cell]. The active eNB 703 [the first cell] may configure the values for N, M, and L through a broadcast in SI [i.e., system broadcast message] and/or through unicast RRC signaling [i.e., dedicated RRC message].” (Emphasis added). See ¶ [0056]. Damnjanovic ‘243 also discloses “the parameters indicate the resources (e.g., subframes, periodicity) on which the overhead signals can be obtained from the dormant eNB 702 [the second cell].” (Emphasis added). Since the N, M, and L values indicate the periodicity of the overhead signal including the SIB, the N, M, and L values can be parameter values (information) for these overhead channels, which, as explained above, teaches “system information block (SIB) information” of claim 1. Therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243’s configuring the values for N, M, and L through a broadcast in SI (the system broadcast message) and/or through unicast RRC signaling (the dedicated RRC message), teaches system broadcast message or the dedicated RRC message carrying “system information block (SIB) information.” Thus, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “wherein the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell is/are carried by a system broadcast message of the first cell or a dedicated RRC message” of claim 1.
Finally, Damnjanovic ‘243 also teaches that the “[o]n the indicated resources, the UE 701 [the apparatus] receives the PSS and the SSS” of the dormant eNB 703 (i.e., reference signal of the second cell) and the UE 701 (the apparatus) “detects the dormant eNB 702 based on the received PSS and the SSS.” See ¶ [0059]. Since the UE 701 (apparatus) receives the PSS and the SSS (reference signal) of the dormant eNB 702 (second cell), Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “detecting a reference signal of the second cell” of claim 1. Additionally, for the UE 701 (apparatus) to detect the dormant eNB 702 based on the received PSS and the SSS, the UE 701 (apparatus) has to have time and frequency synchronization with the dormant eNB 702 (the second cell). Therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243, at least inherently discloses, UE 701 obtaining time and frequency synchronization with the dormant eNB 702 (the second cell), and thus, teaches “obtaining time and frequency synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell” of claim 1.
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)(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, 6, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Damnjanovic et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2014/0235243).
Regarding claim 1, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “[a]n apparatus for receiving a common signal, applicable to a terminal equipment, the apparatus comprising processor circuitry configured to perform: receiving system information block (SIB) information of one or more second cells transmitted by a first cell, wherein the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell is/are carried by a system broadcast message of the first cell or a dedicated RRC message” (see Damnjanovic ¶¶ [0033], [0055], [0056], and [0059] and FIG. 7; terms “eNB,” “base station” and “cell” may be used interchangeably. Dormant eNB 702 (second cell) transmits overhead signals including MIB and SIBs on overhead channels; and UE 701 acquires parameters for overhead channels of the dormant eNB 702 (second cell) from the active eNB 703 (first cell), and parameters indicate the resources on which the overhead signals can be obtained from dormant eNB 702; therefore UE 701 receives MIB information and/or SIB information of the dormant eNB 703 (second cell) via the parameters transmitted by the active eNB 702 (first cell); the active eNB 703 may configure the N ms bursts, M ms with L ms offset values related to the MIB and/or SIB of the dormant eNB 702 through a broadcast and/or through RRC signaling, and indicates the UE 701 to look at multiple burst configurations to acquire the overhead signals from the dormant eNB 702; Since the N, M, and L values indicate the periodicity of the overhead signal including the SIB, the N, M, and L values can be parameter values (information) for these overhead channels, which, as explained above, teaches “system information block (SIB) information” of claim 1. Therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243’s configuring the values for N, M, and L through a broadcast in SI (the system broadcast message) and/or through unicast RRC signaling (the dedicated RRC message), teaches system broadcast message or the dedicated RRC message carrying system information block (SIB) information);
Damnjanovic ‘243 also teaches “detecting a reference signal of the second cell” (see ¶¶ [0055] and [0059]; dormant eNB 702 transmits overhead signals including a PSS and SSS, and the UE 702 receives on the resources indicated by the acquired parameters); and
Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “obtaining time and frequency synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell” (see ¶ [0059]; on the indicated resources, UE 701 receives the PSS and the SSS, and detects the dormant eNB 702 based on the received PSS and the SSS; for the UE 701 (apparatus) to detect the dormant eNB 702 based on the received PSS and the SSS, the UE 701 (apparatus) has to have time and frequency synchronization with the dormant eNB 702 (the second cell). Therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243, at least inherently discloses, UE 701 obtaining time and frequency synchronization with the dormant eNB 702 (the second cell)).
Regarding claim 5, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “receive the system information block (SIB) information of the one or more second cells via a system broadcast message of the first cell” (see ¶ [0056]; the active eNB 703 may configure the N ms bursts, M ms with L ms offset values related to the MIB and/or SIB of the dormant eNB 702 through a broadcast in SI); and
Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “save the system information block (SIB) information of the one or more second cells” (see ¶¶ [0056], [0058], and [0059]; the dormant eNB 702 transmits SIBs and includes indication related to the eNB 702; the UE 701 determines information (e.g., what subframes the UE 701 can detect the dormant eNB 702) based on the indication; therefore, Damnjanovic ‘243 inherently discloses storing the received MIB and/or SIB information and determining the information based on the stored MIB and/or SIB).
Regarding claim 6, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “after the terminal equipment obtains synchronization with the second cell, determine whether the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell is saved” (as discussed above under 112(b) rejection of claim 6, the phrase “determines whether to save” has been construed as “saves” to be consistent with claim 5; see ¶¶ [0056], [0058], and [0059]; Damnjanovic ‘243 inherently discloses storing the received MIB and/or SIB information and determining the information based on the stored MIB and/or SIB); and
Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “enable the terminal equipment to camp on the second cell if the terminal equipment has saved the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell” (see ¶ [0061]; UE 701 receives an RRC connection reconfiguration 716 from the active eNB 703, and performs a random access procedure 718 (e.g., PRACH procedure) with the eNB 702).
Regarding claim 10, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches “receive indication information used for indicating whether timing of the first cell and the second cell is synchronized transmitted by the first cell” (see ¶ [0056] and FIGS. 2 and 7; The dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS, SSS, CRS, MIB, and system information (SI) in SI blocks (SIBs). The System Frame Number (SFN) may be synchronized with neighboring cells by, for example, over-the-air (OTA) synchronization, backhaul based synchronization, or the like; dormant eNB 702 and active eNB can be neighboring cells).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Damnjanovic et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0223267).
Regarding claim 3, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches receiving system information block (SIB) information of the second cell (see Damnjanovic ‘243 ¶¶ [0033], [0055], and [0059] and FIG. 7). While Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose that SIB information includes indication of cell selection information, SIB information including cell selection information was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention. For example, Damnjanovic ‘267 teaches “wherein the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell includes at least one of the following: cell selection information” (see Damnjanovic ‘267 ¶¶ [0070] – [0079]; SIB information includes “cellSelectionInfo” element and corresponding information for cell selection). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Damnjanovic ‘267 and indicate cell selection information in the SIB information of the second cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to receive information related to the selection of the cell/eNB associated with the SIB.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Lu et al. (WO Publication No. 2023/065179 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches receiving MIB and/or SIB information of the second cell via dedicated RRC message and also teaches the UE establishing connection with a second cell using the information indicated in the RRC message (see Damnjanovic ‘243 ¶¶ [0056], [0058], and [0061]; the active eNB 703 may configure the N ms bursts, M ms with L ms offset values related to the MIBs of the dormant eNB 702 through RRC signaling; the System Frame Number (SFN)/subframe offset may be indicated via the MIB and/or SIB, which allow the UE 701 to determine on what subframes the UE 701 can detect the dormant eNB 702; and the UE establishes a connection with dormant eNB 702 in response to an MIB).
Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose “configuring a primary cell (PCell) of the terminal equipment as the second cell” or “configuring a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the terminal equipment as the second cell,” as recited in claim 7. However, Lu teaches “configuring a primary cell (PCell) of the terminal equipment as the second cell” or “configuring a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the terminal equipment as the second cell” (see Lu, p. 8, lines 34-38; terminal equipment configures or updates PCell or the PSCell as the second cell). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Lu to configure the PCell/PSCell as the second cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to update PCell/PSCell configuration in response to receiving an RRC reconfiguration.
Claims 8, 9, 11, 12, 14–16, and 18–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0198659 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as described above and further teaches “a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS) of the second cell” (see ¶¶ [0055] and [0059]; dormant eNB 702 transmits overhead signals including a PSS and SSS, and the UE 702 receives on the resources indicated by the acquired parameters). Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose a reference signal of a cell including both a PSS and an SSS of that cell, and that the PSS and the SSS occupy one symbol respectively.
However, Ko teaches “the reference signal of the second cell includes a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS) of the second cell, the primary synchronization signal (PSS) and the secondary synchronization signal (SSS) occupying one symbol respectively” (see ¶¶ [0063] and [0231] – [0236], and FIG. 32; a synchronization signal (SS)/reference signal is categorized into a PSS and an SSS; in each slot in which the SS is transmitted, the PSS and the SSS occupy one symbol each). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko for a second cell to transmit a reference signal including a PSS and an SSS, the PSS and the SSS occupying one symbol each, and for the UE to receive the reference signal. The suggestion to do so would have been to efficiently transmit the PSS and the SSS to the UE.
Regarding claim 9, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as described above, and also teaches a UE performing initial system access and achieving synchronization with a cell and UE being in a connected state with a cell (e.g., eNB 703). (See Damnjanovic ‘243 at ¶¶ [0041] and [0055]). Damnjanovic ‘243 does not does not appear to explicitly disclose “receive a synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell transmitted by the first cell; and obtain frame synchronization and timing synchronization with the first cell according to the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell,” as recited in claim 9.
However, Ko teaches the foregoing limitations of claim 9 (see ¶¶ [0017] and [0063]; a base station transmitting a synchronization signal block containing a synchronization signal that includes a PSS and an SSS, where the PSS is used to acquire time-domain synchronization and the SSS is used to acquire frame synchronization). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to obtain frame and timing synchronization with a first cell based the SSB of that cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to obtain synchronization with a cell.
Regarding claim 11, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “where the first cell and the second cell are in frame synchronization, the processor circuitry further configured to: obtain frame synchronization information of the second cell according to the frame synchronization information of the first cell, and wherein the frame synchronization information includes a system frame number (SFN) and/or half-frame indicator” (see ¶¶ [0056] and [0058]; SFN of a cell may be synchronized with neighboring cells, where the dormant eNB and the active eNB are in frame synchronization when the System Frame Number (SFN) of the dormant eNB is the same as the SFN of the active eNB; the system information (SI) of dormant eNB includes SFN).
Alternatively, Ko teaches “frame synchronization information of the first cell, and wherein the frame synchronization information includes a system frame number (SFN) and/or half-frame indicator” (see ¶¶ [0017], [0063], and [0296]; a base station transmitting a synchronization signal block containing a synchronization signal that includes an SSS, where the SSS is used to acquire frame synchronization; the synchronization signal block includes a PBCH and the PBCH payload includes SFN). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to use the SFN in the PBCH of Ko to determine whether the SFN of the first cell (active eNB 703) is the same as the SFN of the second cell (dormant eNB 702) and obtain frame synchronization information of the second cell according to the frame synchronization information of the first cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to determine whether system frame numbers of two cells are the same.
Regarding claim 12, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 11 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “wherein the obtaining synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell comprises: obtaining frame synchronization and timing synchronization with the second cell by the processor circuitry according to . . . a time-domain position of the reference signal of the second cell” (see ¶ [0056]; the dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS and SSS in N ms bursts every M ms with L ms offset, and the active eNB 703 signals the values N, M, and L to the UE; therefore, the UE obtains the time domain position of the PSS and SSS (reference signal)).
Damnjanovic ‘243 does not does not appear to explicitly disclose “a time-domain position of the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell, an index of the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell,” as recited in claim 12. However, Ko teaches the foregoing limitations of claim 12 (see ¶ [0291]; the index of SS block is derived from the index of OFDM symbol and slot. For example, the SS block transmitted at slot#1 and OFDM symbol#2 (time-domain position of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB) is mapped to index of 3 (index of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to indicate the time-domain position and index of an SSB transmitted to a UE. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to detect the SSB of the cell.
Regarding claim 14, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “wherein in a case where the first cell and the second cell are not in frame synchronization, the processor circuitry is further configured to receive frame synchronization offset information of the first cell and the second cell transmitted by the first cell, the frame synchronization offset information including a frame number offset, or a frame number offset and a half-frame offset” (see ¶¶ [0058]; if the SFN/subframe offset is different for the dormant eNB 702, the active eNB 703 may signal the difference (frame synchronization offset information) to the UE 701; the difference can include the frame number offset; and if the SFN/subframe offset is different then the dormant eNB and the active eNB are not in frame synchronization).
Regarding claim 15, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to: obtain frame synchronization information with the second cell according to the frame synchronization information of the first cell and the frame synchronization offset information, the frame synchronization information including a system frame number (SFN) and/or half-frame indicator” (see ¶¶ [0056] and [0058]; if the SFN/subframe offset is different for the dormant eNB 702, the active eNB 703 may signal the difference (frame synchronization offset information) to the UE 701; and if the SFN/subframe offset is different then the dormant eNB and the active eNB are not in frame synchronization).
Alternatively, Ko teaches “frame synchronization information of the first cell” and “the frame synchronization information includes a system frame number (SFN) and/or half-frame indicator” (see ¶¶ [0017], [0063], and [0296]; a base station transmitting a synchronization signal block containing a synchronization signal that includes an SSS, where the SSS is used to acquire frame synchronization; the synchronization signal block includes a PBCH and the PBCH payload includes SFN). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to use the SFN in the PBCH of Ko to determine whether the SFN of the first cell (active eNB 703) is different from the SFN of the second cell (dormant eNB 702) and obtain frame synchronization information of the second cell according to the frame synchronization information of the first cell and the signaled difference (the frame synchronization offset information). The suggestion for doing so would have been to allow the UE to determine the frame information of one cell using the frame information of another cell when the frame numbers of the two cells are not the same frame numbers.
Regarding claim 16, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 15 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 further teaches “wherein the obtaining synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell comprises: obtaining frame synchronization and timing synchronization with the second cell by the processor circuitry according to . . . a time-domain position of the reference signal of the second cell” (see ¶ [0056]; the dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS and SSS in N ms bursts every M ms with L ms offset, and the active eNB 703 signals the values N, M, and L to the UE; therefore, the UE obtains the time domain position of the PSS and SSS (reference signal)).
Damnjanovic ‘243 does not does not appear to explicitly disclose “a time-domain position of the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell, an index of the synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first cell,” as recited in claim 16. However, Ko teaches the foregoing limitations of claim 16 (see ¶ [0291]; the index of SS block is derived from the index of OFDM symbol and slot. For example, the SS block transmitted at slot#1 and OFDM symbol#2 (time-domain position of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB) is mapped to index of 3 (index of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to indicate the time-domain position and index of an SSB transmitted to a UE. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to detect the SSB of the cell.
Regarding claim 18, Damnjanovic ‘243 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as described above and further teaches “wherein the system information block (SIB) information of the second cell are carried by a broadcast message of the first cell or a dedicated RRC message” (see ¶ [0056]; the active eNB 703 may configure the N ms bursts, M ms with L ms offset values related to the MIB and/or SIB of the dormant eNB 702 through a broadcast and/or through RRC signaling, and indicates the UE 701 to look at multiple burst configurations to acquire the overhead signals from the dormant eNB 702).
Damnjanovic ‘243 also teaches receiving “system frame number (SFN) . . . of the second cell” (see ¶¶ [0056] and [0058]; the System Frame Number (SFN) may be synchronized with neighboring cells by, for example, over-the-air (OTA) synchronization, backhaul based synchronization, or the like; the SFN/subframe offset of the dormant eNB 702 may be the same as the active eNB 703. If the SFN/subframe offset is different for the dormant eNB 702, the active eNB 703 may signal the difference to the UE 701).
Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload transmitted by a cell and the PBCH payload including a system frame number (SFN). However, a cell transmitting an MIB through a PBCH and a payload of that PBCH including an SFN is well known in the art. For example, Ko teaches “the processor circuitry is further configured to receives a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload transmitted by the second cell, the PBCH payload including a system frame number (SFN)” (see ¶¶ [0063] and [0296] – [0297]; UE receives MIB of a cell through a PBCH, the MIB includes SFN, and the PBCH contents/payload include SFN). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko for a second cell to transmit to a UE, and the for the UE to receive, a PBCH payload including an SFN. The suggestion to do so would have been to transmit MIB and indicate SFN of a cell to a UE in an efficient manner.
Regarding claim 19, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 18 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 19. However, Ko teaches “the reference signal and the physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload of the second cell occupy total two symbols and the reference signal of the second cell includes a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS), the primary synchronization signal (PSS) and the secondary synchronization signal (SSS) occupying one symbol respectively, and the physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload being frequency-division multiplexed with the primary synchronization signal (PSS) and the secondary synchronization signal (SSS)” (see ¶¶ [0063], [0235], and [0236], and FIG. 32(c); a reference/synchronization signal (SS) is categorized into a PSS (primary synchronization signal) and an SSS (secondary synchronization signal); the SS and the PBCH are frequency division multiplexed, and occupy two symbols in total with PSS and the SSS occupying one symbol each). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to frequency division multiplex the PBCH with PSS and the SSS, where the PSS and the SSS occupy one symbol each and the PBCH and the reference/synchronization signal occupy two symbols total. The suggestion to do so would have been to locate the reference/synchronization signal and the PBCH in adjacent subbands.
Regarding claim 20, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 18 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 20. However, Ko teaches “the reference signal and the physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload of the second cell occupy total three symbol; and the reference signal of the second cell includes a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS), the primary synchronization signal (PSS) and the secondary synchronization signal (SSS) occupying one symbol respectively, and the physical broadcast channel (PBCH) payload being further frequency-division multiplexed or time-division multiplexed with the primary synchronization signal (PSS) or the secondary synchronization signal (SSS)” (see ¶¶ [0063], [0231] – [0233], and [0236], and FIGS. 32(a) and (b); a reference/synchronization signal (SS) is categorized into a PSS (primary synchronization signal) and an SSS (secondary synchronization signal); the SS and the PBCH are time-division multiplexed and occupy three symbols in total with PSS and the SSS occupying one symbol each). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Damnjanovic ‘243 to incorporate the teachings of Ko to time-division multiplex the PBCH with PSS and the SSS, where the PSS and the SSS occupy one symbol each and the PBCH and the reference/synchronization signal occupy three symbols total. The suggestion to do so would have been to reduce the complexity of timing detection of the reference/synchronization signal.
Claims 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko and in further view of Jin et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2024/0089857 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 11 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko further teaches “wherein the obtaining synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell comprises: obtaining frame synchronization and timing synchronization with the second cell by the processor circuitry according to . . . the time-domain position of the reference signal of the second cell and a time-domain position of the SSB of the first cell” (see ¶ [0056] of Damnjanovic ‘243 and ¶ [0291] of Ko; the dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS and SSS in N ms bursts every M ms with L ms offset, and the active eNB 703 signals the values N, M, and L to the UE; therefore, the UE obtains the time domain position of the PSS and SSS (reference signal); the index of SS block is derived from the index of OFDM symbol and slot. For example, the SS block transmitted at slot#1 and OFDM symbol#2 (time-domain position of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB)).
The combination of Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko does not appear to explicitly disclose “obtaining a first index of the reference signal from reference signal of the second cell, and obtaining the frame synchronization and timing synchronization of the second cell according to the first index” as recited in claim 13. However, Jin teaches the foregoing limitations of claim 13 (see ¶¶ [0703] and [0704]; the reference signal of a cell can be an SSS, and the reference signal includes at least one of an index (first index) of the reference signal and a beam index of the reference signal; the frame synchronization can be obtained using an SSS according to an index of the SSS). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention as taught by the combination of Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko to incorporate the teachings of Jin to obtain frame synchronization according to an index of a reference signal of a cell in addition to the time-domain positions of the reference signal of the cell and the SSB of another cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to obtain synchronization with a cell.
Regarding claim 17, Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko teaches all of the limitations of claim 15 as described above. Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko further teaches “wherein the obtaining synchronization with the second cell via the detected reference signal of the second cell comprises: obtaining frame synchronization and timing synchronization with the second cell by the processor circuitry according to . . . a time-domain position of the reference signal of the second cell and a time-domain position of the SSB of the first cell” (see ¶ [0056] of Damnjanovic ‘243 and ¶ [0291] of Ko; the dormant eNB 702 may transmit the PSS and SSS in N ms bursts every M ms with L ms offset, and the active eNB 703 signals the values N, M, and L to the UE; therefore, the UE obtains the time domain position of the PSS and SSS (reference signal); the index of SS block is derived from the index of OFDM symbol and slot. For example, the SS block transmitted at slot#1 and OFDM symbol#2 (time-domain position of the SSB of the cell that transmitted the SSB)).
The combination of Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko does not appear to explicitly disclose “obtaining a second index of the reference signal from reference signal of the second cell, and obtaining the frame synchronization and timing synchronization of the second cell according to the first index” as recited in claim 13. However, Jin teaches the foregoing limitations of claim 13 (see ¶¶ [0703] and [0704]; the reference signal of a cell can be an SSS, and the reference signal includes at least one of an index of the reference signal and a beam index (second index) of the reference signal; the frame synchronization can be obtained using an SSS according to an index of the SSS). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention as taught by the combination of Damnjanovic ‘243 in view of Ko to incorporate the teachings of Jin to obtain frame synchronization according to an index of a reference signal of a cell in addition to the time-domain positions of the reference signal of the cell and the SSB of another cell. The suggestion to do so would have been to allow the UE to obtain synchronization with a cell.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SRIHARSHA REDDY VANGAPATY whose telephone number is (571)272-7655. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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.
/SRIHARSHA REDDY VANGAPATY/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/HASHIM S BHATTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights