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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 07/20/2026 have been considered for examination.
With regard to the objections to Specification, Applicant’s arguments filed 07/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the objections to Specification have been withdrawn.
With regard to the objections to Claims, Applicant’s arguments filed 07/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are partially persuasive. Thus, the claim objections other than what is set forth below have been withdrawn.
With regard to the 112(b) rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 07/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are partially persuasive. Thus, the 112(b) rejections what is set forth below have been withdrawn.
On page 19 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
Claim 12 recites "measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the cell where the current beam is located", and ""measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the current serving
cell", Examiner considers that the phrase "relative to the cell ( or the current serving cell)" is indefinite because it fails to provide a clear technical boundary for the measurement. It is unclear whether the "reception time difference" is measured relative to a frame boundary of the cell; a specific reference signal of the cell; or a physical center of the cell. Applicant respectfully submits that the term conveys a clear meaning by its literal wording, requiring no further explanation. A person skilled in the art can readily comprehend the intended meaning based on such literal wording, and thus the term is clear.
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Unlike the applicant’s argument above, the amendment does not identify what specific timing reference associated with the recited cell serves as the reference for the measurement. A “cell” itself does not constitute a measuring timing reference. Therefore, it remains unclear whether the claimed reception time difference is measured relative to, for example, a frame boundary, a synchronization timing, a particular downlink reference signal, or another timing reference associated with the cell.
On page 19 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
Claim 14 recites "wherein the second TA is determined based on a TA difference
indicated by the current serving cell and the TA value of the current serving cell and/or based on
a TA difference indicated by the cell where the current beam is located and the TA value of the
cell where the current beam is located." Examiner considers that it is unclear what each "a TA
difference" as underlined above refers to. Applicant has added punctuation to claim 14 to improve clarity. Furthermore, "and/or" in claim 14 has been amended to "at least one of'. In the amended claim 14, it is clear that the TA difference in claim 14 is a TA difference indicated by the current serving cell, or a TA difference indicated by the cell where the current beam is located. The second TA is also clear. Therefore, the amended claim 14 is clear.
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Unlike the applicant’s argument above, the amendment does not identify what
each "a TA difference" (lines 3 and 5) refers to. For example, “TA difference” requires to associate at least two timing parameters to be compared to give the “TA difference”. However, in the amended limitation, there is no specific definition for “a TA difference” and what timing parameters are involved to the “TA difference.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 07/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments are not applied to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 36-37 are objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 36 recites, “maintaining first TA, wherein the first TA is TA . . .” (line 3). It is suggested to replace it with “maintaining a first TA, wherein the first TA is TA . . .” for more clarity.
Claim 37 recites, “A network side device, comprising a memory, a transceiver, and a processor, . . .”. For clarity and placing the claim into a proper machine claim, it is suggested to replace it with “A network side device, comprising: a memory; a transceiver; and a processor, . . . ” so that the aforementioned list of devices, comprised by the network side device, which are performing these actions/steps (see MPEP 2106.03, section 1; MPEP 2173.05(p), section II).
Claims 17, 19, 23-24, 27, 30, 32-33 and 36-37 are also objected to since they are directly or indirectly dependent upon the objected claims, as set forth above.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites, “measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the cell where the current beam is located” (lines 9-10) and “measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the current serving cell” (lines 11-12). The phrase “relative to the cell (or the current serving cell)” is indefinite because it fails to provide a clear technical boundary for the measurement. It is unclear whether the “reception time difference” is measured relative to” a frame boundary of the cell; a specific reference signal of the cell; or a physical center of the cell. For the sake of examination purpose only, it is interpreted as best understood.
Claim 14 recites, “wherein the second TA is determined based on at least one of a TA difference indicated by the current serving cell, and the TA value of the current serving cell; or a TA difference indicated by the cell where the current beam is located, and the TA value of the cell where the current beam is located.” (lines 1-6). It is unclear what each “a TA difference” as underlined above refers to. Is it “a difference between a TA of the cell where the current beam is located and a TA of the cell where the current beam is located”? It is also unclear what “a TA difference indicated by the cell where the current beam is located and the TA value of the cell where the current beam is located” means. For the sake of examination purpose only, it is interpreted as best understood.
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 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 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 1-3, 6, 9, 16-17, 19, 23-24, 27, 30 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park’730 et al (US Publication No. 2020/0351730 A1)1 in view of Zhou’991 et al (US Publication No. 2022/0014991 A1)2.
Regarding claim 1, Park’730 discloses, a timing advance (TA) based synchronization method, applied to a terminal device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, a timing advanced based synchronization method; further see ¶0338, the wireless device may perform synchronization to the first cell and/or the first base station based on the selected TA; applied to a wireless device (UE)], comprising:
determining a second TA between the terminal device and a cell where a target beam for data transmission and reception of the terminal device is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, step 2930, determining a first timing advance (TA) in response to selecting a beam 1 or a second TA in response to selecting a beam 2; further see ¶0307-0308; note that the first TA (or second TA) is between the UE and a first base station (gNB1) where the beam 1 (or beam 2) for transmission of transport blocks is located]; and
applying the second TA [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, step 2930, transmit transport blocks, via the selected beam of the first cell, using one of the first TA or the second TA; further see ¶0307-0308], wherein the second TA is configured for synchronization between the terminal device and the cell where the target beam is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the first TA (or second TA) is configured for synchronization between the UE and the first base station (gNB1) where the beam 1 (or beam 2) is located; further see ¶0307-0308].
Although Park’730 discloses, the cell where the target beam is located is different from the current serving cell [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; note that the target cell (gNB1) is different from the master gNB], Park’730 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), wherein wherein the cell where the target beam is located is, when the terminal device maintains media access control (MAC) layer and higher layer connections with a current serving cell of the terminal device, a cell where a beam that the terminal device hands over for physical layer data transmission and reception is located.
However, Zhou’991 discloses, wherein wherein the cell where the target beam is located [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0058-0059, see, “RU” labeled target cell of FIG. 6] (see, e.g., FIG. 6 and page 11 of US Provisional App. No. 63/051,321) is, when the terminal device maintains media access control (MAC) layer and higher layer connections with a current serving cell of the terminal device [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0058-0059, when the UE maintain MAC layer and higher layer connection with the current serving cell (see, “RU” labeled source cell of FIG. 6), “source and target cells are supported by (and belong to) the same DU. Thus, L1/L2 mobility may be particularly attractive in this scenario, as the cells can share MAC and upper layers (same DU). In this scenario, when performing a handover via L1/L2 signaling, the data path at MAC and above stays the same”] (see, e.g., FIG. 6 and page 11 of US Provisional App. No. 63/051,321), a cell where a beam that the terminal device hands over for physical layer data transmission and reception is located [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0058-0059, the RU labeled target cell of FIG. 6 is a cell where the UE hands over for PHY layer (only switching from the RU of source cell to the RU of target cell), “the distributed RUs contain only PHY layer and may be used (activated/de-activated) in a similar manner to carrier aggregation (CA)”] (see, e.g., FIG. 6 and page 11 of US Provisional App. No. 63/051,321), and the cell where the target beam is located is different from the current serving cell [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0058-0059, note that the RU of target cell is different from the RU of source cell] (see, e.g., FIG. 6 and page 11 of US Provisional App. No. 63/051,321).
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park’730 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Zhou’991 to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Zhou’991 into the system of Park’730 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling to minimize signaling overhead interruption in a cellular network mobiltiy, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 2, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park’730 further discloses, receiving first indication information transmitted from a network side device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information; further see ¶0307-0308], wherein the first indication information is configured to indicate the terminal device to hand over [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information for a handover to a first cell of the first base station (gNB1); further see ¶0307-0308] from a current beam [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, note that handing over from gNB2 to gNB1 implies a beam switching from a current beam used for the gNB2 to a target beam (e.g., beam 1 or beam 2) used for the gNB1)] for data transmission and reception to the target beam [¶0362, to the beam 1 (or beam 2)]; and
triggering to apply the second TA based on the first indication information [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; transmitting the [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, step 2930, transmitting transport blocks using the first TA (or second TA) based on the access information indicating the first TA or the second TA; further see ¶0307-0308],
wherein the first indication information is at least one of first media access control-control element (MAC-CE) [¶0193, the base station may transmit one or more MAC CEs indicating one or more timing advance values for one or more Timing Advance Groups (TAGs); note that the access information (i.e., first indication information) indicates the timing advance values (e.g., first TA and second TA) as stated in ¶0362 of Park’730].
Regarding claim 3, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park’730 further discloses, receiving first indication information transmitted from a network side device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information], wherein the first indication information is configured to indicate the terminal device to hand over [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information for a handover to a first cell of the first base station (gNB1)] from a current beam [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, note that handing over from gNB2 to gNB1 implies a beam switching from a current beam used for the gNB2 to a target beam (e.g., beam 1 or beam 2) used for the gNB1)] for data transmission and reception to the target beam [¶0362, to the beam 1 (or beam 2)]; and
determining, based on the first indication information, the second TA between the terminal device and the cell where the target beam for data transmission and reception of the terminal device is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, determining, based on the access information, the first TA (or the second TA) between the UE and the first base station (gNB1) where the beam 1 (or beam 2) is located], wherein the first indication information is at least one of first media access control-control element (MAC-CE) [¶0193, the base station may transmit one or more MAC CEs indicating one or more timing advance values for one or more Timing Advance Groups (TAGs); note that the access information (i.e., first indication information) indicates the timing advance values (e.g., first TA and second TA) as stated in ¶0362 of Park’730],
wherein the first indication information [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the access information] comprises one or more of the following:
the second TA between the terminal device and the cell where the target beam for data transmission and reception of the terminal device is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the second TA is configured for synchronization between the UE and the first base station (gNB1) where the beam is located; further see ¶0307-0308].
Regarding claim 6, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park’730 further discloses, receiving first configuration information transmitted from a network side device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information], wherein the first configuration information is configured to indicate the second TA [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the access information indicates the beam 1 or beam 2], and the first configuration information is any one of a first radio resource control (RRC) message [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, receiving a radio resource control message comprising the access information];
wherein determining the second TA between the terminal device and the cell where the target beam for data transmission and reception of the terminal device is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, determining, based on the access information, the first TA (or the second TA) between the UE and the first base station (gNB1) where the beam 1 (or beam 2) is located] comprises:
determining the second TA based on the first configuration information [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, determining the first TA (or second TA) based on the access information], wherein the first configuration information [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the access information] comprises one or more of the following:
a list of TA values of a cell where a candidate target beam is located [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, the first TA and/or the second TA of a cell (gNB1) where beam 1 or beam 2 is located].
Regarding claim 9, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park’730 further discloses, receiving second configuration information transmitted from a network side device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, receiving, from a second base station, a radio resource control message comprising access information], wherein the second configuration information is any one of a second RRC message [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, receiving a radio resource control message comprising the access information], the second configuration information [¶0362, 0323 and 0365, the access information] comprises one or more of the following:
a list of PCIs of the cell where the candidate target beam is located [¶0323, an identifier of a first TRP (e.g., TRP-Index) associated with the first beam and/or the first TA; an identifier of a second TRP (e.g., TRP-Index) associated with the second beam and/or the second TA; further see ¶0365];
a list of TCI state identifiers corresponding to the candidate target beam [¶0323, an identifier of a first TCI state (e.g., at least one TCI-StateId) associated with the first TRP and/or the first TA; an identifier of a second TCI state (e.g., at least one TCI-StateId) associated with the second TRP and/or the second TA; further see ¶0365];
a list of beam indexes corresponding to the candidate target beam [¶0323, a beam index of the first beam (e.g., at least one SSB-Index, at least one CSI-RS-Index); a beam index of the second beam (e.g., at least one SSB-Index, at least one CSI-RS-Index); further see ¶0365]; or
a list of indexes of the cell where the candidate target beam is located ¶0323, an identifier of a first TRP (e.g., TRP-Index) associated with the first beam and/or the first TA; an identifier of a second TRP (e.g., TRP-Index) associated with the second beam and/or the second TA; further see ¶0365].
Regarding claim 16, Park’730 discloses, a timing advance (TA) based synchronization method, applied to a network side device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, a timing advanced based synchronization method; further see ¶0338, the wireless device may perform synchronization to the first cell and/or the first base station based on the selected TA; applied to a base station], comprising:
transmitting first indication information to a terminal device [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, second bae station (gNB2) transmits, to wireless device (UE), a radio resource control message comprising access information; further see ¶0307-0308], wherein the first indication information is configured to indicate the terminal device to apply second TA when the terminal device hands over [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, at 2910, second bae station (gNB2) transmits, to wireless device (UE), a radio resource control message comprising access information for a handover to a first cell of the first base station (gNB1); further see ¶0307-0308] from a current beam [FIGS. 28-29; their related descriptions; ¶0362, note that handing over from gNB2 to gNB1 implies a beam switching from a current beam used for the gNB2 to a target beam (e.g., beam 1 or beam 2) used for the gNB1)] for data transmission and reception to a target beam [¶0362, to the beam 1 (or beam 2)].
Since claim 16 recites similar features to claim 1 without additional features, claim 16 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 recites similar features to claim 6 without additional features, claim 17 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is merely different from claim 9 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a base station, but recites similar features to claim 9 without further additional features. Thus, claim 19 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 9.
Regarding claim 23, Park’730 discloses, a terminal device [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0207, wireless device 110] , comprising a memory [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0207, memory 315], a transceiver [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0207, communication interface 310], and a processor [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0207, processor 314],
wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, the transceiver is configured to transmit and receive data under control of the processor, and the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory and perform the following operations [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0207-0208, the memory 315 is configured to store program code instructions, the communication interfaces 310 is configured to transmit signals under control the processor 314, and the processor 314 is configured to read the program code instructions to perform action(s)].
Since claim 23 recites similar features to claim 1 without additional features, claim 23 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 24, claim 24 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 6.
Regarding claim 30, claim 30 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 9.
Regarding claim 36, claim 36 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 37, Park’730 discloses, a network side device [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0194, base station 120], comprising a memory [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0194, memory 322], a transceiver [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0194, communication interface 320], and a processor [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0194, processor 321],
wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, the transceiver is configured to transmit and receive data under control of the processor, and the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory and perform the TA based synchronization method of claim 16 [FIGS. 3 and 29; their related descriptions; ¶0194, the memory 322 is configured to store program code instructions, the communication interfaces 322 is configured to transmit signals under control the processor 321, and the processor 321 is configured to read the program code instructions to perform action(s)].
Since claim 37 recites similar features to claim 16 without additional features, claim 37 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 16.
Claims 11 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park’730 et al (US Publication No. 2020/0351730 A1) in view of Zhou’991 et al (US Publication No. 2022/0014991 A1) and further in view of Park’183 et al (US Publication No. 2019/0053183 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 9 as set forth above.
Although Park’730 further discloses, in case that the second configuration information comprises at least one of the SRS configuration information, or the uplink data scheduling configuration information, performing uplink signal transmission based on the SRS configuration information [¶0227-0228, a base station may semi-statistically configure a UE with one or more SRS configuration parameters indicating at least one of following: a SRS resource configuration identifier, a number of SRS ports, time domain behavior of SRS resource configuration (e.g., an indication of periodic, semi-persistent, or aperiodic SRS), UE transmits SRS 508 based on SRS resource configuration], Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Park’183 discloses, make the network side device measure the uplink signal and determine, based on a measurement result, a TA value between the terminal device and the current serving cell and/or a TA value between the terminal device and the cell where the candidate target beam is located [¶0213, in response to receiving the one or more first reference signals (i.e., uplink signals), the distributed RAN entity (i.e., network side device) may measure a first uplink timing advance (TA) value for the first cell based on at least one of the one or more first reference signals. In response to receiving the one or more second reference signals, the distributed RAN entity may measure a second uplink TA value for the second cell based on at least one of the one or more second reference signals].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Park’183 to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Park’183 into the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling accurate uplink time alignment by accounting for different prorogation delay when switching between beams or cells, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 32, claim 32 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 11.
Claims 12 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park’730 et al (US Publication No. 2020/0351730 A1) in view of Zhou’991 et al (US Publication No. 2022/0014991 A1) and further in view of Akka et al (US Publication No. 2021/0105867 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 9 as set forth above.
Although Park’730 further discloses, in case that the second configuration information comprises the list of downlink reference signal configuration information corresponding to the current serving cell and the cell where the candidate target beam is located [¶0230, a base station may semi-statistically configure and/or reconfigure a UE with periodic transmission of downlink CSI-RS 522]; measuring a downlink reference signal transmitted from the network side device based on the list of downlink reference signal configuration information corresponding to the current serving cell and the cell where the candidate target beam is located [¶0230, base station configures and/or reconfigure UE with periodic transmission of downlink CSI-RS 522 (i.e., downlink reference signal); further see ¶0244, A wireless device may measure quality of a beam pair link using one or more RSs. One or more SS blocks, or one or more CSI-RS resources, associated with a CSI-RS resource index (CRI), or one or more DM-RSs of PBCH, may be used as RS for measuring quality of a beam pair link], Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Akka discloses, wherein measuring the downlink reference signal transmitted from the network side device comprises one or more of the following:
measuring a reception time of each of downlink reference signals in the list of downlink reference signal configuration information [¶0092, a UE measures the differences between the times of arrival (ToAs) of reference signals (note: this requires measuring a reception time of each downlink reference signal) received from pairs of base stations, and reports them to a positioning entity. More specifically, the UE receives the identifiers of a reference base station (e.g., a serving base station) and multiple non-reference base stations in assistance data];
measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the cell where the current beam is located [¶0092, a UE measures the differences between the times of arrival (ToAs) of reference signals received from pairs of base stations, and reports them to a positioning entity. More specifically, the UE receives the identifiers of a reference base station (e.g., a serving base station) and multiple non-reference base stations in assistance data]; or
measuring a reception time difference of each of the downlink reference signals relative to the current serving cell [¶0092, a UE measures the differences between the times of arrival (ToAs) of reference signals received from pairs of base stations, and reports them to a positioning entity. More specifically, the UE receives the identifiers of a reference base station (e.g., a serving base station) and multiple non-reference base stations in assistance data].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Akka to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Akka into the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling accurate synchronization and more reliable beam or cell selection based on measured timing differences across multiple reference signals, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 33, claim 33 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 15.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park’730 et al (US Publication No. 2020/0351730 A1) in view of Zhou’991 et al (US Publication No. 2022/0014991 A1) and further in view of Jeong et al (US Publication No. 2017/0164310 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 discloses, the method of claim 3 as set forth above.
Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Jeong discloses, wherein the second TA is determined based on at least one of: a TA difference indicated by the current serving cel,l and the TA value of the current serving cell and/or based on a TA difference indicated by the cell where the current beam is located and the TA value of the cell where the current beam is located [¶0055-0056, the second TA value is determined based on the first TA value, a difference between reception timings of downlink signals, determined by the terminal 100, transmitted from the first base station 200 and second base station 300].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Jeong to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Jeong into the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling to derive an accurate TA for a target beam or cell by compensating for TA differences between cells, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park’730 et al (US Publication No. 2020/0351730 A1) in view of Zhou’991 et al (US Publication No. 2022/0014991 A1) and further in view of Guo et al (US Publication No. 2018/0198665 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Park’730 in view of Zhou’991discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Guo discloses, maintaining first TA, wherein the first TA is TA between the terminal device and the current serving cell of the terminal device [FIG. 15; its related descriptions; ¶0156, the UE maintains a first TA value and a second TA value for a serving cell. Each TA value is associated with a different TRP or beam].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Guo to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Guo into the system of Park’730 in view of Zhou’991 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling stable synchronization and reliable communication during ongoing transmission, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Conclusion
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 SUN JONG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3216. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:30pm (M-T).
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.f attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SUN JONG KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
1 Park was cited in an IDS.
2 Zhou’991 claims priority of US Provisional Application No. 63051321 filed on 07/13/2020, thus Zhou’991 is qualified as a prior art under 102(a)(2) for the instant application with the effective filing date 08-13/2021.
Prosecution Insights