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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 14, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 7 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. No. 2026/0025719 (hereinafter “Suh”).
Suh discloses, teaches, or suggests:
regarding claim 7, a system for connecting to a non-terrestrial RAN, the system comprising:
a base station of a terrestrial RAN configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) in a first coverage area (see at least Fig. 9, base station 910 configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of terminals); and
one or more computer processing components (see at least Fig. 3, processor 310) configured to perform operations comprising:
determine a utilization of the base station exceeds a pre-determined threshold (see at least paragraph 196, determining whether the received signal strengths of the neighboring terrestrial base stations are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a utilization of the base station exceeding a pre-determined threshold); and
instruct a UE of the plurality of UEs to connect to one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN, wherein the one or more nodes are configured to wirelessly communicate with the UE in at least a portion of the first coverage area, and wherein a duration of a connection between the UE and the one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN comprises a first time period (see at least Fig. 14, Fig. 18, and paragraphs 195 and 198, the base station transmits a handover command message to the terminal to instruct the terminal to access a satellite 1 for a time period corresponding the first time period, where the satellite 1 is configured to wirelessly communicate with the terminal in at least a portion of the service coverage of the base station);
regarding claim 14, the utilization of the base station is a reference signal received power (RSRP) exceeding a pre-determined RSRP threshold (see at least paragraphs 195 and 196, determining whether the received signal strengths (i.e., RSRPs) of the neighboring terrestrial base stations are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a utilization of the base station exceeding a pre-determined threshold); and
regarding claim 15, the UE of the plurality of UEs is selected based on a distance between the UE and the base station exceeding a pre-determined distance threshold (see at least Fig. 9, Fig. 18, and paragraphs 134, 135, 195, and 196, a received signal strength is low for a terminal located farthest from the base station, which exceeds a pre-determined distance threshold, and therefore the terminal is selected for handover to the satellite 1).
Suh discloses, teaches, or suggests:
regarding claim 16, a system for offloading to a non-terrestrial RAN, the system comprising:
a base station of a terrestrial RAN configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) in a first coverage area (see at least Fig. 9, base station 910 configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of terminals); and
one or more computer processing components (see at least Fig. 3, processor 310) configured to perform operations comprising:
determine a utilization of the base station exceeds a pre-determined threshold (see at least paragraph 196, determining whether the received signal strengths of the neighboring terrestrial base stations are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a utilization of the base station exceeding a pre-determined threshold);
instruct a UE of the plurality of UEs to connect to one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN, wherein the one or more nodes are configured to wirelessly communicate with the UE in at least a portion of the first coverage area (see at least Fig. 14, and paragraphs 195 and 198, the base station transmits a handover command message to the terminal to instruct the terminal to access a satellite 1, where the satellite 1 is configured to wirelessly communicate with the terminal in at least a portion of the service coverage of the base station); and
instruct the UE of the plurality of UEs to disconnect from the base station (see at least paragraph 198, the base station transmits a handover command message to the terminal to instruct the terminal to detach from the base station);
regarding claim 17, the UE of the plurality of UEs is selected based one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) of the UE exceeding one or more predetermined KPI thresholds (see at least paragraphs 134, 135, 195, and 196, the received signal strengths for terrestrial base stations (base stations 1 to n) are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a RSSI exceeding the pre-determined threshold, where a KPI is associated with RSSI);
regarding claim 18, the UE of the plurality of UEs is selected based on a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) received by the UE from the base station exceeding a pre-determined RSSI Threshold (see at least paragraphs 134, 135, 195, and 196, the received signal strengths for terrestrial base stations (base stations 1 to n) are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a RSSI exceeding the pre-determined threshold); and
regarding claim 19, the UE of the plurality of UEs is selected based on a type of session between the UE and the base station (see at least paragraph 195, the terminal is located within a service coverage of the base station 2 and receives services from the base station 2, where the type of session between the UE and the base station 2 is a terrestrial type).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0309976 (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1, Suh discloses, teaches, or suggests a system for switching between a terrestrial radio access network (RAN) and a non-terrestrial RAN, the system comprising:
a base station of a terrestrial RAN configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) in a first coverage area (see at least Fig. 9, base station 910 configured to wirelessly communicate with a plurality of terminals); and
one or more computer processing components (see at least Fig. 3, processor 310) configured to perform operations comprising:
determine a utilization of the base station exceeds a pre-determined threshold see at least paragraph 196, determining whether the received signal strengths of the neighboring terrestrial base stations are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a utilization of the base station exceeding a pre-determined threshold);
instruct a UE of the plurality of UEs to connect to one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN, wherein the one or more nodes are configured to wirelessly communicate with the UE in at least a portion of the first coverage area (see at least Fig. 14, Fig. 18, and paragraphs 195 and 198, the base station transmits a handover command message to the terminal to instruct the terminal to access a satellite 1, where the satellite 1 is configured to wirelessly communicate with the terminal in at least a portion of the service coverage of the base station); and
instruct the UE to communicate with the non-terrestrial RAN in a first time period (see at least Fig. 18, and paragraphs 195 and 198, the base station transmits a handover command message to the terminal to instruct the terminal to access a satellite 1 for a time period corresponding the first time period).
Suh does not explicitly disclose connecting to one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN while maintaining a connection to the base station and instructing the UE to communicate with the terrestrial RAN in a second time period, the second time period being subsequent to the first time period.
However, in an analogous art, Wang discloses, teaches, or suggest a technique for connecting to one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN while maintaining a connection to the base station (see at least Fig. 6 and paragraphs 66-68, the user equipment connects to a satellite 161 of non-terrestrial RAN while maintaining a connection to base stations 121-123) and instructing the UE to communicate with the terrestrial RAN in a second time period, the second time period being subsequent to the first time period (see at least Fig. 6 and paragraphs 66-68, at a later time at position 608 after the user equipment moves through the terrestrial RAN from position 604, the UE adds terrestrial base stations 124 and 125 to an active coordination set and communicates with the terrestrial base stations 123-125 at position 608).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Wang in to the invention of Suh in order to maintain connectivity during mobility.
Regarding claim 2, Suh discloses all of the subject matter of the claimed invention except instructing the UE to communicate with the one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN for a third time period, the third time period being subsequent to the second time period.
However, in an analogous art, Wang discloses, teaches, or suggest instructing the UE to communicate with the one or more nodes of the non-terrestrial RAN for a third time period, the third time period being subsequent to the second time period (see at least Fig. 6 and paragraphs 66-68, the user equipment connects to a satellite 161 of non-terrestrial RAN while maintaining a connection to base stations 121-123) and instructing the UE to communicate with the terrestrial RAN in a second time period, the second time period being subsequent to the first time period (see at least Fig. 6 and paragraphs 66-68, at position 612 after the user equipment moves through the terrestrial RAN from position 608, the UE adds non-terrestrial base station 163 to an active coordination set and communicates with the non-terrestrial base station 127 at position 612, where the time period at position 612 is subsequent to the time period at position 608).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Wang in to the invention of Suh in order to maintain connectivity during mobility.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of Wang, and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0273866 (hereinafter “Swaminathan”).
Regarding claims 3-6, Suh, as modified by Wang, discloses all of the subject matter of the invention of claims 1 and 2, as described above, but does not explicitly disclose that a duration of the first time period is determined based on a session type of the UE, where the first time period comprises a first duration or a second duration, where the first duration is associated with a first session type and the second duration is associated with a second session type, where the second duration is longer than the first duration, where the first session type is a web browsing session and the second session type is a data upload or download session, where a duration of the first time period is determined based on the utilization of the one or more nodes.
However, in an analogous art, Swaminathan discloses, teaches, or suggests that a duration of the first time period is determined based on a session type of the UE (see at least paragraphs 47-52, different traffic scenarios are associated with a duration of time), where the first time period comprises a first duration or a second duration, where the first duration is associated with a first session type and the second duration is associated with a second session type, where the second duration is longer than the first duration (see at least paragraphs 47-52, a first duration is associated with browsing and a second duration is associated with video/audio download, where the duration associated with video/audio download is longer than the duration associated with browsing), where the first session type is a web browsing session and the second session type is a data upload or download session (see at least paragraphs 47-53, browsing session and video/audio download session), where a duration of the first time period is determined based on the utilization of the one or more nodes (see at least paragraphs 47-53, data characteristics may be quantified by a percentage downlik utilization indicative of a percentage of time that a wireless device receives data on the downlink, where the percentage downlink utilization of video/audio download is higher than the percentage downlink utilization of browser traffic).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Swaminathan in to the invention of Suh, as modified by Wang, in order to obtain the benefits of receive diversity while reducing power consumption.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of Swaminathan.
Regarding claims 8-11, Suh discloses all of the subject matter of the invention of claim 7, as described above, but does not explicitly disclose that a duration of the first time period is determined based on a session type of the UE, where the first time period comprises a first duration or a second duration, where the first duration is associated with a first session type and the second duration is associated with a second session type, where the second duration is longer than the first duration, where the first session type is a web browsing session and the second session type is a data upload or download session, where a duration of the first time period is determined based on the utilization of the one or more nodes.
However, in an analogous art, Swaminathan discloses, teaches, or suggests that a duration of the first time period is determined based on a session type of the UE (see at least paragraphs 47-52, different traffic scenarios are associated with a duration of time), where the first time period comprises a first duration or a second duration, where the first duration is associated with a first session type and the second duration is associated with a second session type, where the second duration is longer than the first duration (see at least paragraphs 47-52, a first duration is associated with browsing and a second duration is associated with video/audio download, where the duration associated with video/audio download is longer than the duration associated with browsing), where the first session type is a web browsing session and the second session type is a data upload or download session (see at least paragraphs 47-53, browsing session and video/audio download session), where a duration of the first time period is determined based on the utilization of the one or more nodes (see at least paragraphs 47-53, data characteristics may be quantified by a percentage downlik utilization indicative of a percentage of time that a wireless device receives data on the downlink, where the percentage downlink utilization of video/audio download is higher than the percentage downlink utilization of browser traffic).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Swaminathan in to the invention of Suh in order to obtain the benefits of receive diversity while reducing power consumption.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0113275 (hereinafter “Jia”).
Regarding claim 12, Suh discloses all of the subject matter of the claimed invention except a duration of the first time period being determined based on the utilization of the base station no longer exceeding the pre-determined threshold.
However, in an analogous art, Jia discloses, teaches, or suggests a duration of the first time period being determined based on the utilization of the base station no longer exceeding the pre-determined threshold (see at least Figs. 2 and 3, and paragraphs 50-67, the duration between step 208/308 and step 214/314 is determined based on the condition, such as signal strength or bandwidth, satisfying a trigger for switching back to a terrestrial network).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Jia in to the invention of Suh in order to enable mobile device roaming which balances the performance and the cost of the communication services (see at least paragraphs 26, 27, and 30 of Jia).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2026/0089587 (hereinafter “Hu”).
Regarding claim 13, Suh discloses determining whether the received signal strengths (i.e., RSRPs) of the neighboring terrestrial base stations are below the first threshold, which corresponds to a utilization of the base station exceeding a pre-determined threshold (see at least paragraphs 195 and 196) but Suh does not explicitly disclose a signal to interference noise ratio (SINR).
However, in an analogous art, Hu discloses a signal quality comprising RSRP, RSSI, and SINR (see at least paragraph 82).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the RSRP of Suh with the SINR of Hu because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out such a substitution and the results were reasonable predictable.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2026/0136224 (hereinafter “Bassoy”).
Regarding claim 20, Suh discloses all of the subject matter of the claimed invention except that the utilization of the base station is a number of resource blocks exceeding a pre-determined resource block threshold.
However, in an analogous art, Bassoy discloses, teaches, or suggests that the utilization of the base station is a number of resource blocks exceeding a pre-determined resource block threshold (see at least paragraph 103, PRB utilization of a gNB is lower than a threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the consideration of the PRB utilization of the gNB as taught by Bassoy in to the invention of Suh in order to re-distribute the serving cell load to neighbor cells in order to meet UE QoS requirements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0121692 (Jia et al.) – Non-terrestrial network connection management.
U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0351042 (Esswie) – Adaptive non-terrestrial conditional handover.
U.S. Patent No. 12,610,309 (Maattanen et al.) – Connection control for non-terrestrial networks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Pawaris Sinkantarakorn whose telephone number is (571)270-1424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
/PAO SINKANTARAKORN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409 06/05/2026
Prosecution Insights