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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Remarks
This Office action is considered fully responsive to the amendments filed 08/28/2026.
a) Claims 1-6, 8-18, and 20 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 8, 11, 16, and 20 have been amended, claims 7, 19 have been cancelled, claims 2-6, 9-10, 12-15, and 17-18 were previously presented.
b) The objection to the specification is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
c) The claim rejections under 35 USC § 112(b) is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 08/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that:
Neither reference teaches the newly recited relationship between a holdover duration and an error range allowed for a specific type of service - that is, where "the state information comprises holdover duration information of the first network element that indicates a duration in which the first network element works within a second error range, and wherein the second error range corresponds to an error allowed for a specific type of service." (Pages 8-9, Remarks).
In response to A), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Rippon teaches wherein the state information comprises holdover duration information of the first network element that indicates a duration in which the first network element works within a second error range (Abstract and [0014] states “Information about a maximum error of the time signal may be distributed to time-dependent devices during a holdover period. A receiving device may use the information about the maximum error to determine whether the time signal satisfies an accuracy requirement of the device.” Fig. 3 and [0041] also provides that an estimate of the error of the time signal may also be transmitted, in addition to the total error that may be transmitted in a format that succinctly specifies the accuracy of the time signal, see [0053] and claim 2. That implies the transmission occur after holdover entry, works within the second error range, which also means the second receiving device is considered as second network element to discuss relationship between the sender-receiver), and wherein the second error range corresponds to an error allowed for a specific type of service ([0058] illustrate the receiving device may determine whether the total error is less than an accuracy requirement of the receiving device. The accuracy requirement may vary depending on the device and/or the function performed by a device, and further provides service-specific examples: synchrophasors may require accuracy on the order of tens of nanoseconds, disturbance recording or sequence-of-events recording may require accuracy on the order of microseconds and intelligent power meters, may require a significantly less precise time signal. If the time information satisfies the accuracy requirements of the receiving device. Thus, the second error range, the allowable error threshold applied by the receiving element, corresponds to the allowed accuracy for particular device service/function, such that service-specific allowable of the error range). Therefore, the office action still teach the limitations as currently claimed.
The cited combination of Ruffini, Rippon, and Killen does not teach the claim decision basis of the amended claim11 (Page 9, Remarks).
In response to B), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Ruffini teaches wherein the performing, by the second network element, clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the accuracy information ([0002] and [0101] describes the Synchronization accuracy requirements in these and other scenarios are at the microsecond level according to the 3GPP, that depicts the strong relationship between the synchronizing process according to the available accuracy information. [0051] provides the accuracy information can be used as clock-attribute information for selecting the preferred synchronization source, where the select decision combines OTA synchronization reception quality [0080]. [0059]-[0060] and [0072] state “the method 800 further includes evaluating (Block 806) reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node 14, and synchronizing (Block 808) a clock used by the radio network node for its timing with the preferred synchronization source.” That provides the node synchronizes its own clock with the source once the preferred source is identified see also [0134], claims 20, 27 and 29) comprises performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the holdover duration information and the accuracy information ([0103] states “RUs selecting an internal link as sync source, as the role of RUs in most applications is as a “Sync Receiver.” However, an RU may take the “Sync Provider” role when in Hold-Over, when the RU has the best time accuracy among NGS members.” That means the node/RU in holdover can be the sync provider role if the its holdover capability (timing accuracy during the holdover) is better/ best of the others. That also implies if holdover duration affects the actual accuracy, then, it could influence source selection through the accuracy evaluation. Claims 20 and 27 state “evaluating reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node” which illustrates the evaluation both OTA signal quality and clock attribute data, which includes holdover capability, to select the preferred synchronization source. The element/node then synchronizes its clock with the selected source, as described in [0134], lines 15-21). Therefore, the office action still teach the limitations as currently claimed.
None of the cited references teaches or suggests using a service-specific allowable clock-error range to define the communicated holdover duration and then using that holdover duration information together with accuracy information to perform the claimed clock synchronization (Page 9, Remarks).
In response to C), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Rippon teaches the calculation of the error from the holdover and then compute the error to a service-specific allowable clock-error threshold according to the Eq. 2 and Eq. 5, as [0014] provides that the receiving device may use the information about the maximum error to determine whether the time signal satisfies an accuracy requirement of the device. [0058] also describes accuracy requirement may vary depending on the device and/or the function performed by a device, see also claims 2 and 10. [0014] further discloses that if the time signal accuracy satisfies the accuracy requirement, the time signal information may be used. If the time signal accuracy fails to satisfy the accuracy requirement, the time signal may be discarded. That means the receiving/second element can then compare the estimates accuracy with its own accuracy requirement., see also [0058] which confirms the accuracy information affects whether the second element can use the first timing of the first element “f the time information satisfies the accuracy requirements of the receiving device, the received time information may be utilized at 406.”
For Claim 2 and 12, Rippon does not establish that this predicted total maximum error is the claimed maximum real-time phase accuracy information of the first network element (Page 10, Remarks).
In response to D), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Rippon teaches the total maximum error is the maximum real-time phase accuracy information of the first network element. Claim 2, [0041] and Table 1-2 confirm that the estimation of the total estimated maximum error is transmitted as a real time accuracy information for the local time signal. Table 1, for example included “ The time is accurate to within 250 ns ….” That confirms the real-time measurements within the local time signal.
The office action fails to teach “"the second network element [stops] using first information [that] is accuracy information of the first network element in a locked state." “ for claim 13, (Page 10, Remarks).
In response to E), the examiner respectfully disagrees Rippon teaches stopping, by the second network element, using first information, wherein the first information is accuracy information of the first network element in a locked state (Claim 10 provides the receiving device receiving the local time signal and the estimated total maximum error; determining that the estimated total maximum error exceeds an accuracy requirement; and disregarding the local time signal. [0043] describes the comparison may be made during a period of time in which the time signal generated by the internal oscillator and the external time signal are both available, which can be considered as locked state. [0058] states “At 404, the receiving device may determine whether the total error is less than an accuracy requirement of the receiving device.” and [0014] states “If the time signal accuracy satisfies the accuracy requirement, the time signal information may be used. If the time signal accuracy fails to satisfy the accuracy requirement, the time signal may be discarded.” That implies if the time data fails to satisfy the accuracy requirements, then the received time data may be disregarded/ stooped at Step 408 in Fig. 4. [0013] states “time-dependent devices may be configured to rely on a best available time signal, when available, and may be configured to enter a holdover period when the best available time signal is unavailable. “ see also [0081] lines 10-13 and claim 2, which provide that this process can be applied in both states locked and holdover states, as the transmitted accuracy info reflects the current state).
Applicant argues that the remaining claims, dependent claims are allowable for similar reasons (Page 11, Remarks).
Examiner respectfully disagrees, for at least the same reasons given in the response above, and as detailed in the Claim Rejections section.
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 1-5, 8, 10-13, 16-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruffini et al. (US-20200413360-A1), in view of Rippon et al. (US 20150364953 A1).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Ruffini teaches a method for sending accuracy information (Fig. 12[0005], [0099] and [0100]-[0102] provides details for synchronizing radio network nodes using OTA signals to exchange the clock attribution data of timing and accuracy information for synchronizing source selection, [0026], [0059] and claim 29), wherein the method comprises: switching, by a first network element, from a locked state to a holdover state ([0018] describes the node is synchronized to the reference (locked) such as GNSS or another node/BS, see also [0052] which states “the radio network node 14 selects the best or most preferred synchronization reference automatically, based on acquiring clock-attribute information from other radio network nodes 14 that are candidates for its use in RIBS, and making a joint or combined evaluation of the clock-attribute information and the reception qualities of the OTA synchronization signals received from the candidate nodes 14.” [0103] states “However, an RU may take the “Sync Provider” role when in Hold-Over, when the RU has the best time accuracy among NGS members.” Where [0022] states “These roles are dynamic and may change as the sync capabilities of involved nodes change, although role updating happens in a controlled fashion to avoid sporadic role changes” see also [0026]-[0027] and [0108], that describe the approach for automatic re-selection of synchronization sources if the current source degrades or fails, which means switching from the locked state, synchronized with a reference, to holdover state such as maintain the timing until the new reference is selected [0072] and [0108], the node can switch back to the locked state via synchronizing to the new source when the synchronization sources is identified, as stated in [0087] and claim 29, where [0058] states “The first radio network node 14 may further time-synchronize to the second radio network node 14—i.e., operate according to the same time epoch or time reference—based on receiving additional information indicating the synchronization source of the other clock 44.” Which describes the first network element, see also [0061] that states “Such other radio network nodes 14 are thus considered as “candidates” or “candidate nodes” for consideration in synchronization source selection operations” as a neighbor that can servers as a synchronization source/ second network element);
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches and sending, by the first network element, state information to a second network element , wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state ([0014], [0041], [0081] and claims 1-2 state, during the holdover, “ The holdover subsystem may be configured to transmit an estimated total maximum error to the receiving devices 525 together with the time signal” as shown in FIG. 2. That implies the transmitted accuracy information, estimated total max. error, as computed based on the time dependent and temperature dependent error models [0079], which quantifies the accuracy of the signal during the holdover for the first network element, Abstract lines 11-15, table 1 and [0054]. Fig. 4 shows the receiving device, the second network element, receives both time signal and the estimate of the total error, accurate information, and then determines whether the time signal meet the accuracy requirements, Step 404, as described in [0056], [0007] and [0058]); and wherein the state information comprises holdover duration information of the first network element that indicates a duration in which the first network element works within a second error range (Abstract and [0014] states “Information about a maximum error of the time signal may be distributed to time-dependent devices during a holdover period. A receiving device may use the information about the maximum error to determine whether the time signal satisfies an accuracy requirement of the device.” Fig. 3 and [0041] also provides that an estimate of the error of the time signal may also be transmitted, in addition to the total error that may be transmitted in a format that succinctly specifies the accuracy of the time signal, see [0053] and claim 2. That implies the transmission occur after holdover entry, works within the second error range, which also means the second receiving device is considered as second network element to discuss relationship between the sender-receiver), and wherein the second error range corresponds to an error allowed for a specific type of service ([0058] illustrate the receiving device may determine whether the total error is less than an accuracy requirement of the receiving device. The accuracy requirement may vary depending on the device and/or the function performed by a device, and further provides service-specific examples: synchrophasors may require accuracy on the order of tens of nanoseconds, disturbance recording or sequence-of-events recording may require accuracy on the order of microseconds and intelligent power meters, may require a significantly less precise time signal. If the time information satisfies the accuracy requirements of the receiving device. Thus, the second error range, the allowable error threshold applied by the receiving element, corresponds to the allowed accuracy for particular device service/function, such that service-specific allowable of the error range).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 2 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 1,
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches wherein the accuracy information comprises real-time phase accuracy peak information of the first network element that indicates maximum real-time phase accuracy of the first network element in the holdover state (Table 1, Fig. 3, Claims 1, 2, 14 and [0081] states “The holdover subsystem 572 may further be configured to estimate a maximum time-dependent error based on the time-dependent signal drift rate and a duration of the holdover period and to estimate a maximum temperature-dependent error based on a current temperature and the temperature-dependent signal drift rate.” And then estimate the total max. error (peak error, worse case) that could be occur during the holdover period, as stated in [0081] “ The holdover subsystem may be configured to transmit an estimated total maximum error to the receiving devices 525 together with the time signal. In one specific embodiment, the holdover subsystem 572 may implement the method illustrated in FIG. 2”. Table 2, [0071] and Claim 2 confirm that these measurements are continuously estimated during the holdover duration based on the local time signal and current temperature and current drift rate time error, which also means the estimated total max. error represents the peak, phase error could occur at any time (local time signal) during the holdover, Abstract and [[0050], Eq. 3, claim 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 3 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 1,
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches wherein the accuracy information comprises frequency accuracy information that indicates a frequency deviation ratio of the first network element in the holdover state ([0014] states “a device may be configured to monitor the drift of a local time source with respect to an external time source and to retain information regarding the drift rate. In various embodiments, the drift rate may be influenced by a temperature at which the time source operates (i.e., a temperature-dependent error component) and by a time-dependent component.” [0049], Eqs. 2-3 and [0050] indicates that the drift rate, frequency deviation ratio, is an important parameter in the process of the error/accuracy estimation, [0042] and [0081], claims 1 and 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 4 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 1,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the state information comprises holdover capability information of the first network element (Fig. 12 and [0102] states “Information on degraded performance due to RIBS hops and/or characteristics of RF as well as uncompensated distance could be implicitly carried by the fields of this TLV (e.g., maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, bcHopCount).” That implies these information in Fig. 12 included the clock attribute data that the first network node/element may share with others [0071], [0130] to allow the neighboring nodes to assess the capability of the first network node to act as synchronizing source, as sated in [0051] “In at least one example, the configuration data 42 includes own-clock attribute information that allows the radio network node 14 to report the clock type, quality, priority, and/or other clock attributes, so that its preferability for use as a synchronization source by other nodes 14 may be assessed”).
Regarding claim 5 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 4,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the holdover capability information comprises real-time accuracy ([0102] states ” Example ENHANCED ACCURACY METRICS TLVs are shown in the table labeled as FIG. 12. Information on degraded performance due to RIBS hops and/or characteristics of RF as well as uncompensated distance could be implicitly carried by the fields of this TLV (e.g., maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, bcHopCount”, and [0087] states “The target node 14 can, therefore, periodically or on a triggered basis, evaluate the radio link conditions between it and respective ones of the candidate nodes 14 and use the current or most-recently assessed link conditions as input data for its synchronization-source selection algorithm.” That implies the node can periodically or based on triggering evaluate and update these values/metrics that related to the real-time accuracy, such as maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, etc. to reflect the real-time/current status ) or step accuracy.
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 1,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the state information comprises clock reference source type information ([0059] states “Such attributes include, for example, any one or more of an identification of the synchronization source of the clock 44, e.g., GNSS-based timing, an indication of the number of hops separating the clock 44 from its synchronization source, which is referred to as the clock stratum, clock and/or node identifiers, a clock priority level indicating its preferability or priority for selection, etc.” and [0018] states “The further synchronization parameters may also include a Synchronization Status parameter that indicates whether the node signaling such parameter is connected to a synchronized reference clock, such as a GPS source, or to a non-synchronized reference clock, e.g., a drifting clock” see also [0015]. That implies the state information exchanged between the elements can include clock reference source type information), and wherein the clock reference source type information comprises a parameter of a clock reference source adapted to the first network element ( [0026] states “Having access to the clock-attribute information for other radio network nodes in the same domain or subdomain allows a given node to select the best or most preferred synchronization source for use in synchronizing its own clock, based on a combined or joint evaluation of parameters or metrics that include the reception quality of OTA signals from respective ones of the candidate nodes and the corresponding clock-attribute information.” See also [0052] and [0059], that provide the selection for identify which clock reference source is best adapted to its requirements).
Regarding claim 10 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 1,
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches wherein the state information comprises local source type information that indicates a type of a local oscillator of the first network element ([0019] states “A variety of time sources are contemplated, including: a voltage-controlled temperature compensated crystal oscillator (VCTCXO), a phase locked loop oscillator, a time locked loop oscillator, a rubidium oscillator, a cesium oscillator, a microelectromechanical device (MEM), an oven controlled crystal oscillator (OCXO), a temperature compensated crystal oscillator (TCXO), and/or other device capable of tracking the passage of time” and [0046] states “ In addition to creating a model for the maximum error attributable to a temperature-dependent function of the local oscillator, a maximum time-dependent error may also be created.” see also [0012] and claim 6. That implies the state information can include local source type information related to the type of local oscillator of the network device.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 11 (Currently Amended), Ruffini teaches a method for sending accuracy information (Fig. 12[0005], [0099] and [0100]-[0102] provides details for synchronizing radio network nodes using OTA signals to exchange the clock attribution data of timing and accuracy information for synchronizing source selection, [0026] and [0059]), wherein the method comprises: performing, by the second network element, clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the accuracy information ([0060] and [0072] state “he method 800 further includes evaluating (Block 806) reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node 14, and synchronizing (Block 808) a clock used by the radio network node for its timing with the preferred synchronization source.” That provides the node synchronizes its own clock with the source once the preferred source is identified see also [0134], claims 20, 27 and 29), and wherein the performing, by the second network element, clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the accuracy information ([0002] and [0101] describes the Synchronization accuracy requirements in these and other scenarios are at the microsecond level according to the 3GPP, that depicts the strong relationship between the synchronizing process according to the available accuracy information. [0051] provides the accuracy information can be used as clock-attribute information for selecting the preferred synchronization source, where the select decision combines OTA synchronization reception quality [0080]. [0059]-[0060] and [0072] state “the method 800 further includes evaluating (Block 806) reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node 14, and synchronizing (Block 808) a clock used by the radio network node for its timing with the preferred synchronization source.” That provides the node synchronizes its own clock with the source once the preferred source is identified see also [0134], claims 20, 27 and 29) comprises performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the holdover duration information and the accuracy information ([0103] states “RUs selecting an internal link as sync source, as the role of RUs in most applications is as a “Sync Receiver.” However, an RU may take the “Sync Provider” role when in Hold-Over, when the RU has the best time accuracy among NGS members.” That means the node/RU in holdover can be the sync provider role if the its holdover capability (timing accuracy during the holdover) is better/ best of the others. That also implies if holdover duration affects the actual accuracy, then, it could influence source selection through the accuracy evaluation. Claims 20 and 27 state “evaluating reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node” which illustrates the evaluation both OTA signal quality and clock attribute data, which includes holdover capability, to select the preferred synchronization source. The element/node then synchronizes its clock with the selected source, as described in [0134], lines 15-21).
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches receiving, by a second network element, state information from a first network element, wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in a holdover state ([0014], [0041], [0081] and claims 1-2 state, during the holdover, “ The holdover subsystem may be configured to transmit an estimated total maximum error to the receiving devices 525 together with the time signal” as shown in FIG. 2. That implies the transmitted accuracy information, estimated total max. error, as computed based on the time dependent and temperature dependent error models [0079], which quantifies the accuracy of the signal during the holdover for the first network element, Abstract lines 11-15, table 1 and [0054]. Fig. 4 shows the receiving device, the second network element, receives both time signal and the estimate of the total error, accurate information, and then determines whether the time signal meet the accuracy requirements, Step 404, as described in [0056], [0007] and [0058]); and wherein the state information comprises holdover duration information of the first network element that indicates a duration in which the first network element works within a second error range (Abstract and [0014] states “Information about a maximum error of the time signal may be distributed to time-dependent devices during a holdover period. A receiving device may use the information about the maximum error to determine whether the time signal satisfies an accuracy requirement of the device.” Fig. 3 and [0041] also provides that an estimate of the error of the time signal may also be transmitted, in addition to the total error that may be transmitted in a format that succinctly specifies the accuracy of the time signal, see [0053] and claim 2. That implies the transmission occur after holdover entry, works within the second error range, which also means the second receiving device is considered as second network element to discuss relationship between the sender-receiver), and wherein the second error range corresponds to an error allowed for a specific type of service ([0058] illustrate the receiving device may determine whether the total error is less than an accuracy requirement of the receiving device. The accuracy requirement may vary depending on the device and/or the function performed by a device, and further provides service-specific examples: synchrophasors may require accuracy on the order of tens of nanoseconds, disturbance recording or sequence-of-events recording may require accuracy on the order of microseconds and intelligent power meters, may require a significantly less precise time signal. If the time information satisfies the accuracy requirements of the receiving device. Thus, the second error range, the allowable error threshold applied by the receiving element, corresponds to the allowed accuracy for particular device service/function, such that service-specific allowable of the error range. Claim 14 clearly provides the relationship between the holdover duration and a service-specific allowable error, as stated “estimate a maximum time-dependent error based on a duration of the holdover period; “ and Eq. 2 also illustrates the relationship between the total error against its service, it uses the time signal if the error be below the requirement and discards it if the error exceeds it [0079]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 12 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 11,
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches wherein the accuracy information comprises real-time phase accuracy peak information of the first network element that indicates maximum real-time phase accuracy of the first network element in the holdover state (Table 1, Fig. 3, Claims 1, 2, 14 and [0081] states “The holdover subsystem 572 may further be configured to estimate a maximum time-dependent error based on the time-dependent signal drift rate and a duration of the holdover period and to estimate a maximum temperature-dependent error based on a current temperature and the temperature-dependent signal drift rate.” And then estimate the total max. error (peak error, worse case) that could be occur during the holdover period, as stated in [0081] “ The holdover subsystem may be configured to transmit an estimated total maximum error to the receiving devices 525 together with the time signal. In one specific embodiment, the holdover subsystem 572 may implement the method illustrated in FIG. 2”. Table 2, [0071] and Claim 2 confirm that these measurements are continuously estimated during the holdover duration based on the local time signal and current temperature and current drift rate time error, which also means the estimated total max. error represents the peak, phase error could occur at any time (local time signal) during the holdover, Abstract and [[0050], Eq. 3, claim 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 13 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 12, further comprising:
Ruffini does not explicitly teach but Rippon teaches stopping, by the second network element, using first information, wherein the first information is accuracy information of the first network element in a locked state (Claim 10 provides the receiving device receiving the local time signal and the estimated total maximum error; determining that the estimated total maximum error exceeds an accuracy requirement; and disregarding the local time signal. [0043] describes the comparison may be made during a period of time in which the time signal generated by the internal oscillator and the external time signal are both available, which can be considered as locked state. [0058] states “At 404, the receiving device may determine whether the total error is less than an accuracy requirement of the receiving device.” and [0014] states “If the time signal accuracy satisfies the accuracy requirement, the time signal information may be used. If the time signal accuracy fails to satisfy the accuracy requirement, the time signal may be discarded.” That implies if the time data fails to satisfy the accuracy requirements, then the received time data may be disregarded/ stooped at Step 408 in Fig. 4. [0013] states “time-dependent devices may be configured to rely on a best available time signal, when available, and may be configured to enter a holdover period when the best available time signal is unavailable. “ see also [0081] lines 10-13 and claim 2, which provide that this process can be applied in both states locked and holdover states, as the transmitted accuracy info reflects the current state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini to incorporate the teachings of Rippon (in analogous art) by adding wherein the state information comprises accuracy information of the first network element in the holdover state for enabling reliable, secure, and correct operation during the period of lost synchronization connection (Rippon, [0011], lines 1-3 and [0040]).
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 11,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the state information comprises holdover capability information of the first network element (Fig. 12 and [0102] states “Information on degraded performance due to RIBS hops and/or characteristics of RF as well as uncompensated distance could be implicitly carried by the fields of this TLV (e.g., maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, bcHopCount).” That implies these information in Fig. 12 included the clock attribute data that the first network node/element may share with others [0071], [0130] to allow the neighboring nodes to assess the capability of the first network node to act as synchronizing source, as sated in [0051] “In at least one example, the configuration data 42 includes own-clock attribute information that allows the radio network node 14 to report the clock type, quality, priority, and/or other clock attributes, so that its preferability for use as a synchronization source by other nodes 14 may be assessed”); and where the performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the accuracy information ([0060] and [0072] state “he method 800 further includes evaluating (Block 806) reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node 14, and synchronizing (Block 808) a clock used by the radio network node for its timing with the preferred synchronization source.” That provides the node synchronizes its own clock with the source once the preferred source is identified see also [0134], claims 20, 27 and 29) comprises: performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the holdover capability information and the accuracy information ([0103] states “RUs selecting an internal link as sync source, as the role of RUs in most applications is as a “Sync Receiver.” However, an RU may take the “Sync Provider” role when in Hold-Over, when the RU has the best time accuracy among NGS members.” That means the node/RU in holdover can be the sync provider role if the its holdover capability (timing accuracy during the holdover) is better/ best of the others. Claims 20 and 27 state “evaluating reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node” which illustrates the evaluation both OTA signal quality and clock attribute data, which includes holdover capability, to select the preferred synchronization source. The element/node then synchronizes its clock with the selected source, as described in [0134] lines 15-21).
Regarding claim 17 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 16,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the holdover capability information comprises real-time accuracy ([0102] states ” Example ENHANCED ACCURACY METRICS TLVs are shown in the table labeled as FIG. 12. Information on degraded performance due to RIBS hops and/or characteristics of RF as well as uncompensated distance could be implicitly carried by the fields of this TLV (e.g., maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, bcHopCount”, and [0087] states “The target node 14 can, therefore, periodically or on a triggered basis, evaluate the radio link conditions between it and respective ones of the candidate nodes 14 and use the current or most-recently assessed link conditions as input data for its synchronization-source selection algorithm.” That implies the node can periodically or based on triggering evaluate and update these values/metrics that related to the real-time accuracy, such as maxDynamicInaccuracy, GmInaccuracy, etc. to reflect the real-time/current status ) or a step accuracy value of the first network element.
Regarding claim 20 (Currently Amended), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 11,
Ruffini further teaches wherein the state information comprises clock reference source type information ([0059] states “Such attributes include, for example, any one or more of an identification of the synchronization source of the clock 44, e.g., GNSS-based timing, an indication of the number of hops separating the clock 44 from its synchronization source, which is referred to as the clock stratum, clock and/or node identifiers, a clock priority level indicating its preferability or priority for selection, etc.” and [0018] states “The further synchronization parameters may also include a Synchronization Status parameter that indicates whether the node signaling such parameter is connected to a synchronized reference clock, such as a GPS source, or to a non-synchronized reference clock, e.g., a drifting clock” see also [0015]. That implies the state information exchanged between the elements can include clock reference source type information), and wherein the clock reference source type information comprises a parameter of a clock reference source adapted to the first network element ( [0026] states “Having access to the clock-attribute information for other radio network nodes in the same domain or subdomain allows a given node to select the best or most preferred synchronization source for use in synchronizing its own clock, based on a combined or joint evaluation of parameters or metrics that include the reception quality of OTA signals from respective ones of the candidate nodes and the corresponding clock-attribute information.” See also [0052] and [0059], that provide the selection for identify which clock reference source is best adapted to its requirements); and wherein the performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the accuracy information ([0060] and [0072] state “he method 800 further includes evaluating (Block 806) reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node 14, and synchronizing (Block 808) a clock used by the radio network node for its timing with the preferred synchronization source.” That provides the node synchronizes its own clock with the source once the preferred source is identified see also [0134], claims 20, 27 and 29) comprises: performing, by the second network element, the clock synchronization with the first network element or the second network element based on the clock reference source type information and the accuracy information ([0103] states “RUs selecting an internal link as sync source, as the role of RUs in most applications is as a “Sync Receiver.” However, an RU may take the “Sync Provider” role when in Hold-Over, when the RU has the best time accuracy among NGS members.” That means the node/RU in holdover can be the sync provider role if the its holdover capability (timing accuracy during the holdover) is better/ best of the others. Claims 20 and 27 state “evaluating reception qualities of the respective OTA synchronization signals together with the corresponding clock-attribute information, to identify a preferred synchronization source for the radio network node” which illustrates the evaluation both OTA signal quality and clock attribute data, which includes holdover capability, to select the preferred synchronization source. The element/node then synchronizes its clock with the selected source, as described in [0134] lines 15-21. In addition, [0059] states “Such attributes include, for example, any one or more of an identification of the synchronization source of the clock 44, e.g., GNSS-based timing, an indication of the number of hops separating the clock 44 from its synchronization source, which is referred to as the clock stratum, clock and/or node identifiers, a clock priority level indicating its preferability or priority for selection, etc.” and [0061] states “The radio network node 14 uses a combination of parameters or metrics to select a synchronization source for its clock 44, at least assuming that its own clock 44 does not already have a better synchronization source, e.g., a built-in GPS receiver.” That indicates the count of clock reference source for performing the synchronization process).
6. Claims 6, 9, 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruffini et al. (US-20200413360-A1) in view of Rippon et al. (US 20150364953 A1) and further in view of Killen et al. (US-20190053164-A1).
Regarding claim 6 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 4,
Ruffini and Rippon do not explicitly teach but Killen teaches wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range ([0003] states “The at least one measurement may include real-time, predictive, or historic data. The method may also include determining a holdover duration based on the at least one measurement. The holdover duration corresponds to a length of time where the power of the global-positioning-system receiver or the power of the active antenna is to be turned off. The method may also include deactivating the power of the global-positioning-system receiver or the power of the active antenna for the holdover duration.” See also Fig. 2a and [0074] that confirms the holdover capability information include duration in which the first network element works within a first error range, which clearly provided in Abstract, claims 1 and 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini in view of Rippon to incorporate the teachings of Killen (in analogous art) by adding wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range for reducing the energy that is consumed by the access point and providing an operational flexibility (Killen, [0046] and [0067]).
Regarding claim 9 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach The method according to claim 8, wherein the clock reference source type information comprises one or more of the following:
Ruffini and Rippon do not explicitly teach but Killen teaches a mode of a satellite receiver adapted to the first network element ([0048] states “Synchronization may be adjusted based on new GPS measurement data, and then the GPS receiver may be powered off again to save power. This cycle may continue indefinitely, for as long as the eNB requires GPS synchronization.” See also [0051] and claim 11. That implies the using of GPS as a mode od=f satellite receiver for adapted the holdover duration period), or a frequency band of a satellite receiver adapted to the first network element.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini in view of Rippon to incorporate the teachings of Killen (in analogous art) by adding wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range for reducing the energy that is consumed by the access point and providing an operational flexibility (Killen, [0046] and [0067]).
Regarding claim 14 (Previously Presented), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 11,
Ruffini and Rippon do not explicitly teach but Killen teaches wherein the accuracy information comprises frequency accuracy information that indicates a frequency deviation ratio of the first network element in the holdover state ([0053] and its equation directly related to the frequency accuracy because it calculates how long the element/node remains in holdover based on the max. frequency drift that allowed and the measured drift rate of the oscillator due to the temperature variation, as stated in [0005] and [0018]. That implies the accuracy information included frequency accuracy that indicates a frequency deviation ratio of the element in the holdover state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini in view of Rippon to incorporate the teachings of Killen (in analogous art) by adding wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range for reducing the energy that is consumed by the access point and providing an operational flexibility (Killen, [0046] and [0067]).
Regarding claim 18 (Original), Ruffini and Rippon teach the method according to claim 16,
Ruffini and Rippon do not explicitly teach but Killen teaches wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range ([0003] states “The at least one measurement may include real-time, predictive, or historic data. The method may also include determining a holdover duration based on the at least one measurement. The holdover duration corresponds to a length of time where the power of the global-positioning-system receiver or the power of the active antenna is to be turned off. The method may also include deactivating the power of the global-positioning-system receiver or the power of the active antenna for the holdover duration.” See also Fig. 2a and [0074] that confirms the holdover capability information include duration in which the first network element works within a first error range, which clearly provided in Abstract, claims 1 and 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ruffini in view of Rippon to incorporate the teachings of Killen (in analogous art) by adding wherein the holdover capability information comprises duration in which the first network element works within a first error range for reducing the energy that is consumed by the access point and providing an operational flexibility (Killen, [0046] and [0067]).
Relevant Prior Art
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Gulati et al. (US-20200053683-A1), Ellenbeck et al. (US-20210243713-A1), Sun et al. (CN-102388556-A), and Gu et al. (CN-114465690-A) teach methods for improving the synchronization process between the nodes in network systems.
Conclusion
8. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights