DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed 14 April 2026. Claims 20-31 and 33-34 are pending in this application.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 20-25 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiong (US 2022/0408228) in view of Xu et al. (US 2021/0337491) and Qi et al. (US 2023/0254666).
For Claims 20 and 33, Xiong teaches a method performed by a central unit (CU) in a wireless communication system, and a central unit (CU) in a wireless communication system, the CU comprising: at least one transceiver; at least one processor; and at least one memory operatively connected to the at least one processor and configured to store instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform a specific operation (see paragraphs 12-14: hardware), the method comprising:
receiving, by the CU, a first message for a multicast broadcast service (MBS) session start request or an MBS session update request from an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see paragraphs 273: CU and DU; 284-285, 310: AMF session start request; 286, 311: reception by CU);
performing a coordination, in case that an MBS provision area includes a plurality of DUs based on the first message (see paragraph 286: CU selects Dus);
transmitting a second message for a context setup request including information related to an MBS provision to each of the DUs (see paragraphs 54, 287: context process, session establishment request); and
receiving a third message for a context setup response including information related to the MBS provision from each of the DUs (see paragraph 287).
Xiong as applied above is not explicit as to, but Xu teaches obtaining, by the CU, reference time information from each of distributed units (DUs) (see paragraphs 14, 19, 170-173); and
performing at least one of a coordination or a synchronization through the reference time information obtained from the each of the DUs (see paragraphs 14, 19, 170-173).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use reference time information as in Xu when establishing MBS session services as in Xiong. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of synchronizing the services within the MBS service area.
The references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Qi teaches the method wherein the first message comprises a list of cells specifying the MBS provision area for an MBS service (see paragraphs 29-32, 509-510: MBS broadcast area cell list, signaling list to CU).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to provide signaling as in Qi when implementing the method of Xiong and Xu. The motivation would be to include information necessary to serve the multicast session data.
For Claim 21, Xiong further teaches the method, wherein the first message further comprises a service identity identifying the MBS service for the MBS provision area (see paragraph 285).
For Claim 22, Xiong further teaches the method, wherein the first message transmitted from the AMF is received by the CU based on at least one of a multimedia broadcast and multicast service (MBMS) session start request message or an MBMS session update request message (see paragraphs 284-285).
For Claim 23, Xiong as applied above is not explicit as to, but Xu further teaches the method, wherein the reference time information received from each of the DUs comprises at least one of a system frame number (SFN), a subframe index or slot information (see paragraphs 170-173).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use reference time information as in Xu when establishing MBS session services as in Xiong. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of synchronizing the services within the MBS service area.
For Claim 24, Xiong as applied above is not explicit as to, but Xu further teaches the method, wherein the coordination or the synchronization are performed using at least one of the SFN, the subframe index or the slot (see paragraphs 14, 19, 170-173).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use reference time information as in Xu when establishing MBS session services as in Xiong. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of synchronizing the services within the MBS service area.
For Claim 25, Xiong further teaches the method, wherein the information related to the MBS provision transmitted from the CU to each of the DUs comprises at least one of a time indication, a service identity or a list of cells (see paragraphs 287-288).
Claim(s) 26-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiong (US 2022/0408228), Xu et al. (US 2021/0337491), and Qi et al. (US 2023/0254666) as applied to claims 20 and 23-25 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (WO 2021/062778, citing the translation provided with the first Office action).
For Claim 26, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Huang teaches the method, wherein the each of the DUs determines a transmission time of a data packet for the MBS service based on the received information related to the MBS provision (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to determine the transmission time as in Huang when providing synchronized MBS services as in Xiong and Xu. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using available information to synchronize the services.
For Claim 27, while Xiong teaches plural DUs (see paragraph 286), the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Huang teaches the method, wherein, in case that the CU receives first reference time information from a first DU among the DUs and receives second reference time information from a second DU among the DUs, the CU performs at least one of the coordination or the synchronization such that data packets for the MBS service are simultaneously transmitted from the first DU and the second DU based on the first reference time information and the second reference time information (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to determine the transmission time as in Huang when providing synchronized MBS services as in Xiong and Xu. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using available information to synchronize the services.
For Claim 28, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Huang teaches the method, wherein the CU transmits first time indication information to the first DU and transmits second time indication information to the second DU based on at least one of the coordination or the synchronization (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to determine the transmission time as in Huang when providing synchronized MBS services as in Xiong and Xu. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using available information to synchronize the services.
For Claim 29, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Huang teaches the method, wherein a transmission time of the data packet for the MBS service is determined by the first DU based on the first time indication information and determined by the second DU based on the second time indication information, respectively (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to determine the transmission time as in Huang when providing synchronized MBS services as in Xiong and Xu. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using available information to synchronize the services.
For Claim 30, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Huang teaches the 29, wherein the transmission time of the data packet by the first DU is determined to be the same as the transmission time of the data packet by the second DU based on the at least one of the coordination or the synchronization by the CU (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202; the Dus are in sync).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to determine the transmission time as in Huang when providing synchronized MBS services as in Xiong and Xu. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of using available information to synchronize the services.
For Claim 31, Xiong, Xu, and Huang as applied above are not explicit as to, but Qi teaches the method, wherein the first time indication information and the second time indication information are different from each other (see paragraphs 97-100: CU signaling to DU for setup; paragraphs 34-36, 39, 67: UE specific delivery modes necessarily indicated differently to DUs).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to provide different indicates to the different DUs as in Qi when setting up different DUs as in Xiong, Xu, and Huang. The motivation would be to allow for adjustments to transmission parameters depending on the different UE environments.
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (WO 2021/062778, citing to the translation provided with the first Office action) in view of Xiong (US 2022/0408228) and Qi et al. (US 2023/0254666).
For Claim 34, Huang teaches a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving at least one of coordination/synchronization information, a multicast/broadcast service (MBS) service identity information or cell list information from a distributed unit (DU) (see underlined portions on p. 2-4 of the translation); and
receiving a data packet based on the MBS service in an MBS provision area (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202),
wherein, in case that the MBS provision area includes a plurality of DUs, the data packet among a plurality of data packets transmitted simultaneously from the plurality of DUs is received by the terminal (see underlined portions on p. 8-11 of the translation; items 201 and 202).
Huang as applied above is not explicit as to, but Xiong teaches a coordination or a synchronization being performed by the CU based on a first message for an MBS session start request or an MBS session update request in case that the MBS provision area includes the plurality of DUs (see paragraph 286: CU selects Dus),
wherein the first message is transmitted from an access and mobility management function (AMF) to the CU (see paragraphs 273: CU and DU; 284-285, 310: AMF session start request; 286, 311: reception by CU).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to coordinate services as in Xiong when implementing the MBS service as in Huang. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of optimizing MBS transmissions.
The references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Qi teaches the method wherein the first message comprises a list of cells specifying the MBS provision area for an MBS service (see paragraphs 29-32, 509-510: MBS broadcast area cell list, signaling list to CU).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to provide signaling as in Qi when implementing the method of Huang and Xiong. The motivation would be to include information necessary to serve the multicast session data.
Response to Arguments
The amendment filed 14 April 2026 has been entered.
Previous rejections under 35 USC 112 are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections over prior art have been fully considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection introduced herein. The claims remain rejected under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang et al. (US 2025/0133579) teaches a system in which MBSFN services are synchronized in a service area.
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 CASSANDRA L DECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3946. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 4:00 pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/CASSANDRA L DECKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2466 4/28/2026
/FARUK HAMZA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights