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 .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of the present application is a continuation application of prior Application number 17/477,031, filed on September 16, 2021, which has issued as U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264 on July 9, 2024 and is based on and claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) of a Korean patent application number 10-2020-0120567, filed on September 18, 2020, in the Korean Intellectual Property Office.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of information disclosure statement (IDS), dated on July 8, 2024, April 24, 2026, and July 29, 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner's Notes
4. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Application Status
5. Acknowledgment is made of the present application is filed on July 8, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Claim Objections
6. Claim 12 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 12, it recites, “The method of claim 6, wherein the configuration information for the TA report is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message.”
It is a method-step claim that depends from claim 6. Claim 6 recites, “The method of claim 3, wherein the configuration information for the TA report is received via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message.”
Apparently, claim 12 includes a wherein clause, i.e., “wherein the configuration information for the TA report is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message” indicated in italics above, which is nothing but repeating the limitation in claim 3.
A correction is anticipated.
Double Patenting
7. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
8. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
Regarding claim 1, it recites, “A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
identifying a first timing advance (TA) for the UE;
determining a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite;
determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA; and
transmitting, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA.”
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264 recites, “A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA);
identifying a first TA based on the information associated with the TA;
determining a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite to compensate for link delay;
determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA;
receiving, from the base station, information for TA reporting, the information including offset for the TA reporting; and
transmitting, to the base station, a TA report related to the third TA.”
Both claim 1 of the instant application and claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264 are method-step claim performed by a UE, having the same preamble, i.e., “A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system.” Claim 1 includes similar limitations, which are a part of the limitations in claim 1 of the patent. The following are the limitation mappings/teaching:
for the 1st step in claim 1, i.e., “identifying a first timing advance (TA) for the UE,”
“identifying a first TA” indicated in italics in claim 1 of the patent teaches this limitation;
for the 1st determining-step in claim 1, i.e., “determining a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite,”
claim 1 of the patent includes the same limitation, as indicated in italics above;
for the 2nd determining-step in claim 1, i.e., “determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA,”
claim 1 of the patent includes the same limitation;
for the last step in claim 1, i.e., “transmitting, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA,”
the last limitation “transmitting, to the base station, a TA report related to the third TA” in claim 1 of the patent reads on this limitation.
Based on the information presented above, claim 1 includes the elements that are a part of the claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264. In fact, claim 1 is merely a broader version of the claim 1 of the patent by eliminating the terms, e.g., “receiving, from a base station, system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA)” as indicated in italics above.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA).
Similar rejection applies to claims 2-20 as follows:
9. Claims 2 and 3 are both rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
10. Claims 4-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264, individually.
11. Claims 7-9 are all rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
12. Claims 10-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 6-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264, individually.
13. Claims 13-15 are all rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
14. Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
15. Claims 17-19 are all rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
16. Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,035,264.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
17. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
18. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
19. Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (US 2022/0086780).
Regarding claim 1, Tsai et al. teach the method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (paragraphs [0145] lines 1-11 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE);” in fact, the schematic diagram regards to UE 404 in communication with gNB 406 as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches this preamble in the instant application), the method comprising:
identifying a first timing advance (TA) for the UE (paragraphs [0147] lines 1-12 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
in fact, UE 404 receiving/identifying a common TA as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “identifying a first timing advance (TA) for the UE” in the instant application);
determining a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite (paragraph [0147] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: satellite 402 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a serving satellite;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second TA;”
in fact, estimating/determining UE-Specific TA based on the UE 404 location and the satellite 402 location as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite” in the instant application);
determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA (paragraph [0146] lines 1-5; Examiner’s Notes: a full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a third TA;”
in fact, determining a full TA regards to the UE based on Common TA and UE-Specific TA as shown in expression [A] in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA” in the instant application); and
transmitting, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA (paragraph [0149] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., UE 404 depicted in FIG.4, performing UL transmission/reporting based on determined the full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 4, Tsai et al. further teach the method, wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs (paragraph [0148] lines 12-23; Examiner’s Notes: all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of UEs;” in fact, sharing a common propagation delay of the common TA to all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 7, Tsai et al. teach the method performed by a base station in a wireless communication system (paragraphs [0145] lines 1-11 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: gNB 406 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station;” in fact, the schematic diagram regards to gNB 406 in communication with UE 404 as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches this preamble in the instant application), the method comprising:
receiving, from a user equipment (UE), an uplink signal at time at which a third timing advance (TA) of the UE is applied (paragraph [0145] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE);”
in fact, BS/gNB 406 receiving uplink signal regards to full timing advance (TA) from UE 404, as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from a user equipment (UE), an uplink signal at time at which a third timing advance (TA) of the UE is applied” in the instant application); and
receiving, from the UE, a TA report related to the third TA (paragraph [0149] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., UE 404 depicted in FIG.4, performing UL transmission/reporting based on determined the full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from the UE, a TA report related to the third TA” in the instant application),
wherein the third TA for transmission from the UE is determined based on a first TA and a second TA (paragraph [0146] lines 1-5; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second TA; a full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a TA;”
in fact, determining a full TA regards to the UE based on Common TA and UE-Specific TA as shown in expression [A] in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA” in the instant application),
wherein the first TA is determined by the base station (paragraphs [0147] lines 1-12 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
in fact, BS/gNB 406 determining/identifying a common TA as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is determined by the base station” in the instant application), and
wherein the second TA is determined by the UE based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite (paragraph [0147] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: satellite 402 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a serving satellite;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “the second TA;
in fact, estimating/determining UE-Specific TA based on the UE 404 location and the satellite 402 location as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second TA is determined by the UE based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 10, Tsai et al. further teach the method, wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs (paragraph [0148] lines 12-23; Examiner’s Notes: all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of UEs;” in fact, sharing a common propagation delay of the common TA to all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 13, Tsai et al. teach the user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (paragraphs [0145] lines 1-11 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., 404 depicted in FIG. 4 and 1600 depicted in FIG. 16, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “user equipment (UE);”
in fact, the schematic diagram regards to UE 404 in communication with gNB 406 as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches this preamble in the instant application), the UE comprising:
a transceiver (paragraph [0272] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: transceiver 1620 in UE/node 1600 depicted in FIG. 16 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a transceiver” in the instant application); and
a processor (paragraph [0272] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: processor 1626 in UE/node 1600 depicted in FIG. 16 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a processor” in the instant application) coupled with to the transceiver and configured to:
identify a first timing advance (TA) for the UE (paragraphs [0147] lines 1-12 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
in fact, UE 404 receiving/identifying a common TA as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “identify a first timing advance (TA) for the UE” in the instant application);
determine a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite (paragraph [0147] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: satellite 402 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a serving satellite;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second TA;”
in fact, estimating/determining UE-Specific TA based on the UE 404 location and the satellite 402 location as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “determine a second TA based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite” in the instant application);
determine a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA (paragraph [0146] lines 1-5; Examiner’s Notes: a full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a third TA;”
in fact, determining a full TA regards to the UE based on Common TA and UE-Specific TA as shown in expression [A] in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determine a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA” in the instant application); and
transmit, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA (paragraph [0149] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., UE 404 depicted in FIG.4, performing UL transmission/reporting based on determined the full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit, to a base station, a TA report related to the third TA” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 16, Tsai et al. further teach the UE, wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs (paragraph [0148] lines 12-23; Examiner’s Notes: all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of UEs;” in fact, sharing a common propagation delay of the common TA to all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 17, Tsai et al. teach the base station in a wireless communication system (paragraphs [0145] lines 1-11 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: gNB, e.g., 406 depicted in FIG. 4 and 1600 depicted in FIG. 16, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station;”
in fact, the schematic diagram regards to gNB 406 in communication with UE 404 as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches this preamble in the instant application), the base station comprising:
a transceiver (paragraph [0272] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: transceiver 1620 in gNB/node 1600 depicted in FIG. 16 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a transceiver” in the instant application); and
a processor (paragraph [0272] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: processor 1626 in gNB/node 1600 depicted in FIG. 16 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a processor” in the instant application) connected to the transceiver and configured to:
receive, from a user equipment (UE), an uplink signal at time at which a third timing advance (TA) of the UE is applied (paragraph [0145] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE);”
in fact, BS/gNB 406 receiving uplink signal regards to full timing advance (TA) from UE 404, as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive, from a user equipment (UE), an uplink signal at time at which a third timing advance (TA) of the UE is applied” in the instant application); and
receive, from the UE, a TA report related to the third TA (paragraph [0149] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., UE 404 depicted in FIG.4, performing UL transmission/reporting based on determined the full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive, from the UE, a TA report related to the third TA” in the instant application),
wherein the third TA for transmission from the UE is determined based on a first TA and a second TA (paragraph [0146] lines 1-5; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second TA; a full TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a TA;”
in fact, determining a full TA regards to the UE based on Common TA and UE-Specific TA as shown in expression [A] in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a third TA for transmission from the UE based on the first TA and the second TA” in the instant application),
wherein the first TA is determined by the base station (paragraphs [0147] lines 1-12 & [0148] lines 1-23; Examiner’s Notes: a common TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first TA;”
in fact, BS/gNB 406 determining/identifying a common TA as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is determined by the base station” in the instant application), and
wherein the second TA is determined by the UE based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite (paragraph [0147] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: satellite 402 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a serving satellite;”
UE-Specific TA depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “the second TA;
in fact, estimating/determining UE-Specific TA based on the UE 404 location and the satellite 402 location as illustrated in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second TA is determined by the UE based on a position of the UE and a position of a serving satellite” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 20, Tsai et al. further teach the base station, wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs (paragraph [0148] lines 12-23; Examiner’s Notes: all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of UEs;” in fact, sharing a common propagation delay of the common TA to all UEs in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is a TA which is commonly applied to a plurality of UEs” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
20. 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 of this title, 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.
21. Claims 2, 8, 14, and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US 2022/0086780) in view of Edge (US 2021/0144669).
Regarding claim 2, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA.
Edge from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA (paragraph [0584] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: the system information block (SIB) indicating TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA);”
in fact, UE 105 receiving the system information block (SIB) indicating TA as shown in step 2 in FIG. 38 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Edge in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA, is to further enhance the mechanism for satellite access to a 5G core network, wherein the UE receives configuration information for fixed cells and fixed tracking areas associated with a serving PLMN, a position of the UE is used to determine a fixed serving cell and fixed tracking area for the UE, a service operation for the UE is enabled for the serving PLMN based on the fixed serving cell or the fixed tracking area. A fixed cell may be associated with an overlapping fixed tracking area by assigning a color code to the tracking area and appending the color code to an ID for the fixed cell.
Regarding claim 8, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA.
Edge from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA (paragraph [0584] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: the system information block (SIB) indicating TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA);”
in fact, UE 105 receiving the system information block (SIB) indicating TA as shown in step 2 in FIG. 38 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Edge in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA, is to further enhance the mechanism for satellite access to a 5G core network, wherein the UE receives configuration information for fixed cells and fixed tracking areas associated with a serving PLMN, a position of the UE is used to determine a fixed serving cell and fixed tracking area for the UE, a service operation for the UE is enabled for the serving PLMN based on the fixed serving cell or the fixed tracking area. A fixed cell may be associated with an overlapping fixed tracking area by assigning a color code to the tracking area and appending the color code to an ID for the fixed cell.
Regarding claim 14, Tsai et al. teach the UE without explicitly teaching receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA.
Edge from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA (paragraph [0584] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: the system information block (SIB) indicating TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA);”
in fact, UE 105 receiving the system information block (SIB) indicating TA as shown in step 2 in FIG. 38 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Edge in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving, from the base station, system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA, is to further enhance the mechanism for satellite access to a 5G core network, wherein the UE receives configuration information for fixed cells and fixed tracking areas associated with a serving PLMN, a position of the UE is used to determine a fixed serving cell and fixed tracking area for the UE, a service operation for the UE is enabled for the serving PLMN based on the fixed serving cell or the fixed tracking area. A fixed cell may be associated with an overlapping fixed tracking area by assigning a color code to the tracking area and appending the color code to an ID for the fixed cell.
Regarding claim 18, Tsai et al. teach the base station without explicitly teaching transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA.
Edge from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA (paragraph [0584] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: the system information block (SIB) indicating TA in the prior art teaches the limitation of “system information block (SIB) including information associated with a timing advance (TA);”
in fact, UE 105 receiving the system information block (SIB) indicating TA as shown in step 2 in FIG. 38 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Edge in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), system information block (SIB) including information related to the first TA, is to further enhance the mechanism for satellite access to a 5G core network, wherein the UE receives configuration information for fixed cells and fixed tracking areas associated with a serving PLMN, a position of the UE is used to determine a fixed serving cell and fixed tracking area for the UE, a service operation for the UE is enabled for the serving PLMN based on the fixed serving cell or the fixed tracking area. A fixed cell may be associated with an overlapping fixed tracking area by assigning a color code to the tracking area and appending the color code to an ID for the fixed cell.
22. Claims 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US 2022/0086780) in view of Chang (US 2021/0243658).
Regarding claim 3, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching the configuration information including offset for the TA report.
Chang from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, receiving, from the base station, configuration information for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 1-25; Examiner’s Notes: UE receiving, from the base station, configuration message regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from the base station, configuration information for the TA report” in the instant application),
the configuration information including offset for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 4-25; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration message indicating the offset regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the configuration information including offset for the TA report” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Chang in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing the configuration information including offset for the TA report, is to further enhance the mechanism for the method of configuration message sent by a base station, wherein candidate frequency points are measured to obtain a signal strength parameter of each candidate frequency point, and report information of the at least one candidate frequency point is reported to the base station, so the network operation is performed.
Regarding claim 6, Tsai et al. further teach the method, wherein the configuration information for the TA report is received via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message (paragraph [0213] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the configuration information, e.g., specific indication regards to reporting UE-specific timing advance (TA) report via a DCI, MAC CE, or RRC message in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the configuration information for the TA report is received via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 9, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching the configuration information including offset for the TA report.
Chang from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, transmitting, to the UE, configuration information for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 1-25; Examiner’s Notes: UE receiving, from the base station, configuration message regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting, to the UE, configuration information for the TA report” in the instant application),
the configuration information including offset for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 4-25; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration message indicating the offset regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the configuration information including offset for the TA report” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Chang in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing the configuration information including offset for the TA report, is to further enhance the mechanism for the method of configuration message sent by a base station, wherein candidate frequency points are measured to obtain a signal strength parameter of each candidate frequency point, and report information of the at least one candidate frequency point is reported to the base station, so the network operation is performed.
Regarding claim 12, Tsai et al. further teach the method, wherein the configuration information for the TA report is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message (paragraph [0213] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the configuration information, e.g., specific indication regards to reporting UE-specific timing advance (TA) report via a DCI, MAC CE, or RRC message in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the configuration information for the TA report is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 15, Tsai et al. teach the UE without explicitly teaching the configuration information including offset for the TA report.
Chang from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, receiving, from the base station, configuration information for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 1-25; Examiner’s Notes: UE receiving, from the base station, configuration message regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from the base station, configuration information for the TA report” in the instant application),
the configuration information including offset for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 4-25; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration message indicating the offset regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the configuration information including offset for the TA report” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Chang in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing the configuration information including offset for the TA report, is to further enhance the mechanism for the method of configuration message sent by a base station, wherein candidate frequency points are measured to obtain a signal strength parameter of each candidate frequency point, and report information of the at least one candidate frequency point is reported to the base station, so the network operation is performed.
Regarding claim 19, Tsai et al. teach the base station without explicitly teaching the configuration information including offset for the TA report.
Chang from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, transmitting, to the UE, configuration information for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 1-25; Examiner’s Notes: UE receiving, from the base station, configuration message regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting, to the UE, configuration information for the TA report” in the instant application),
the configuration information including offset for the TA report (paragraph [0081] lines 4-25; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration message indicating the offset regards to the advance time/period in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the configuration information including offset for the TA report” in the instant application) and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Chang in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing the configuration information including offset for the TA report, is to further enhance the mechanism for the method of configuration message sent by a base station, wherein candidate frequency points are measured to obtain a signal strength parameter of each candidate frequency point, and report information of the at least one candidate frequency point is reported to the base station, so the network operation is performed.
23. Claims 5 and 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US 2022/0086780) in view of Atungsiri et al. (US 2023/0300768).
Regarding claim 5, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching receiving the first TA via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message.
Atungsiri et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the first TA is received via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message (paragraph [0072] lines 1-15; Examiner’s Notes: gNB providing, to UE, information regards to the TA via RRC signaling/message in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is received via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Atungsiri et al. in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving the first TA via a radio resource control (RRC) message, is to further enhance the mechanism for electronic device (UE) to compensate feeder link influence on the common TA (T.sub.com) in a transparent payload non-terrestrial network (NTN) configuration with a non-terrestrial network component (NT-RN) and an infrastructure equipment (gNB) tethered by the non-terrestrial network component (NT-RN).
Regarding claim 11, Tsai et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching transmitting the first TA via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message.
Atungsiri et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the first TA is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message (paragraph [0072] lines 1-15; Examiner’s Notes: gNB providing, to UE, information regards to the TA via RRC signaling/message in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the first TA is transmitted via at least one of downlink control information (DCI), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a radio resource control (RRC) message” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Atungsiri et al. in the system of Tsai et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving the first TA via a radio resource control (RRC) message, is to further enhance the mechanism for electronic device (UE) to compensate feeder link influence on the common TA (T.sub.com) in a transparent payload non-terrestrial network (NTN) configuration with a non-terrestrial network component (NT-RN) and an infrastructure equipment (gNB) tethered by the non-terrestrial network component (NT-RN).
Conclusion
24. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shabtay et al. (US 2010/0234071) is directed to the vehicle integrated communications system that provides a solution to the poor performance experienced at the cell edge in a cellular communications system due to weak signal strength and high interference levels;
Alpert et al. (US 2009/0180451) is cited to show in the event two or more RATs desire to be active at the same time, the mechanism negotiates an availability pattern between the MS and a corresponding BS to achieve coordination between the RATs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.b
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights