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 .
Status of the Application
This Office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed June 25, 2026. Claims 2, 7, 8, 12, 17 and 18 have been amended; no claims have been added or cancelled. Claims 1-20 are pending and are examined herein. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/04/2025 and 02/10/2026 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 25, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to Applicant’s argument that “neither Cheng nor TS 38.331 discloses or suggests a feature of utilizing a specific timestamp as an active dynamic trigger to initiate downlink (DL) synchronization” (Remarks, page 7, paragraph 3), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 1 requires that the downlink synchronization with the first satellite be performed “based on the time information” and “starting from a time indicated by the timestamp”; the claim does not recite an active dynamic trigger, and nothing in the claim excludes a time reference that the network signals to the UE in advance. TS 38.331, in the very passage relied on in the rejection, prescribes that sequence: on executing a reconfiguration with sync toward a target NTN cell the UE is directed to “start synchronizing to the DL of the target SpCell” and, where NTN-Config is configured for the target cell, to “start timer T430 with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration from the subframe indicated by epochTime, according to the target cell NTN-Config” (TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2). The epochTime so relied on is itself a timestamp expressed in downlink sub-frame units, because TS 38.331 defines it as follows: “When explicitly provided through SIB, or through dedicated signaling, the EpochTime is the starting time of a DL sub-frame, indicated by a SFN and a sub-frame number signaled together with the assistance information” (TS 38.331, page 690).
Further, Cheng supplies the target-cell timing on which that downlink synchronization is carried out, teaching that the reconfiguration message “may also provide the RRM information of the target cell, such as the SMTC IE for the SSB periodicity, offset, and duration configuration of the target cell for the NR PSCell and PCell changes” and that “The UE may synchronize with the target cell and complete the RRC handover procedure by sending an RRCReconfigurationComplete message to target BS 406” (Cheng, para [0069]). Thus, the combination accordingly reads on the disputed limitation, as set forth in the rejection below.
In regard to Applicant’s argument that “By contrast, in the cited paragraphs, Cheng merely describes modifying offset values for SSB Measurement Timing Configurations (SMTCs), while TS 38.331 merely provides general time information definitions” (Remarks, page 7, paragraph 3), in response to applicant’s arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The rejection does not rely on Cheng alone for the epoch-time reference from which the downlink synchronization begins, nor on TS 38.331 alone for the target-cell synchronization timing; it relies on what the combined teachings of TS 38.331, Cheng and TS 38.300 would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art, as set forth in the rejection below.
As to Applicant’s argument that the recited configuration provides “a specific temporal trigger mechanism that enables the UE to pinpoint the exact moment to establish synchronization, thereby significantly reducing unnecessary scanning power and connection latency” (Remarks, page 7, paragraph 2), in response to applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a temporal trigger mechanism that pinpoints the exact moment at which synchronization is established, a reduction in scanning power, and a reduction in connection latency) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Turning to Applicant’s argument that “In detail, based on paragraph [0010], Cheng describes that a UE performs neighbor cell measurements within pre-configured and static SMTC windows based on specified offsets” (Remarks, page 7, paragraph 4), Cheng, para [0010] is a statement of one aspect of Cheng’s disclosure appearing in Cheng’s summary, and it is not a paragraph on which the rejection relies. The rejection relies instead on Cheng’s detailed description of satellite handover, which teaches that “In NTN, a serving satellite connected to a source BS may change to a target satellite connected to a different target BS from time to time, while the UE may remain the same. This scenario may be called an inter-BS satellite handover procedure” (Cheng, para [0070]), together with the target-cell timing and synchronization teaching of Cheng, para [0069] quoted above. Whether the SMTC windows of Cheng are themselves fixed or adjusted does not reach the disputed limitation, because the time from which the downlink synchronization begins is supplied by the epochTime of the target cell NTN-Config in TS 38.331, and not by the SMTC offsets of Cheng.
Finally, Applicant argues that independent claim 11 recites “features similar to those recited in unamended independent claim 1” and is patentably distinguishable for the same reasons, and that claims 2-10 and 12-20 are patentably distinguishable “for at least the same reasons presented above, and also for additional limitations recited in the dependent claims” (Remarks, page 8, paragraphs 1 and 2). Because the arguments directed to claim 1 are not persuasive for the reasons given above, the corresponding arguments directed to claim 11 are likewise not persuasive. The additional limitations of the dependent claims are not identified or argued, and each of those limitations is separately addressed in the rejections below.
For at least these reasons, Applicant's arguments are not persuasive. The Examiner has clarified the rejections below to better explain how the cited art reads on the invention as claimed. Accordingly, this office action is made final.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 1-4, 6-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ETSI TS 38 331 V17.5.0 (2023-07) in view of Cheng (US 2022/0046498 A1) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38 300 V17.5.0 (2023-06).
Regarding claim 1, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses: A method for satellite switching performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: acquiring, from a cell, a first configuration related to a first satellite, the first configuration comprising a timestamp and time information, because TS 38.331 teaches a UE that obtains, from an NR cell, the NTN configuration of a satellite, that configuration carrying both the epoch time at which the assistance information takes effect and the associated timing parameters, and the UE thereafter switching to a target satellite cell identified by its downlink frequency and physical cell identity: (TS 38.331, page 487 “SIB19 contains satellite assistance information for NTN access.”; TS 38.331, page 488 “Provides parameters needed for the UE to access NR via NTN access such as Ephemeris data, common TA parameters, k_offset, validity duration for UL sync information and epoch.”; TS 38.331, page 690 “When explicitly provided through SIB, or through dedicated signaling, the EpochTime is the starting time of a DL sub-frame, indicated by a SFN and a sub-frame number signaled together with the assistance information”; TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2 “consider the target SpCell to be one on the SSB frequency indicated by the frequencyInfoDL with a physical cell identity indicated by the physCellId”)
Furthermore, TS 38.331 discloses: re-acquiring, from the first satellite, a second configuration related to the first satellite, because TS 38.331 teaches that the UE obtains the satellite assistance information of that same cell again before the validity of the information it holds runs out, the validity period being counted from the sub-frame that the epoch time designates: (TS 38.331, page 60, §5.2.2.4.21 “start or restart T430 for serving cell with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration for the serving cell from the subframe indicated by epochTime for the serving cell”; TS 38.331, page 60, §5.2.2.4.21 “UE should attempt to re-acquire SIB19 before the end of the duration indicated by ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration and epochTime by UE implementation.”)
Although TS 38.331 teaches that, in executing a reconfiguration with sync toward a target NTN cell, the UE begins synchronizing to the downlink of the target cell and starts the assistance-information validity timer from the sub-frame that the target cell’s epoch time designates: (TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2), TS 38.331 does not explicitly disclose that the downlink synchronization with the first satellite is itself carried out on the basis of the time information so as to begin at the time the timestamp indicates.
However, TS 38.331 in view of Cheng discloses performing, based on the time information, a downlink (DL) synchronization with the first satellite, starting from a time indicated by the timestamp because Cheng teaches that the UE moves from a serving satellite to a target satellite in a satellite handover procedure, that the reconfiguration message sent to the UE for that target satellite cell provides the measurement timing configuration fixing the periodicity, offset and duration of the target cell’s synchronization signal blocks, and that the UE then synchronizes with the target cell on that timing (Cheng, para [0070], “In NTN, a serving satellite connected to a source BS may change to a target satellite connected to a different target BS from time to time, while the UE may remain the same. This scenario may be called an inter-BS satellite handover procedure.”; Cheng, para [0069], “It may also provide the RRM information of the target cell, such as the SMTC IE for the SSB periodicity, offset, and duration configuration of the target cell for the NR PSCell and PCell changes.”; Cheng, para [0069], “The UE may synchronize with the target cell and complete the RRC handover procedure by sending an RRCReconfigurationComplete message to target BS 406.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to carry out the downlink synchronization toward the NTN target cell of TS 38.331 in the manner Cheng describes, so that the epoch-time reference already carried in the target cell NTN-Config governs when the UE begins acquiring that cell’s synchronization signal blocks. Both references address the same problem, namely synchronizing a UE to a satellite cell whose propagation delay changes as the satellite moves, and both express the solution in NR radio resource control signalling, so the combination amounts to the use of a known technique to improve a comparable device in the same way, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Even though TS 38.331 in view of Cheng teaches the network-provided common timing advance parameters carried in the NTN configuration and the delivery of that configuration to the UE for the satellite cell it is switching to: (TS 38.331, page 689; Cheng, para [0069]), TS 38.331 in view of Cheng does not explicitly disclose that the UE additionally derives a timing advance of its own from the re-acquired configuration.
Nevertheless, TS 38.331 in view of Cheng and further in view of TS 38.300 discloses calculating a common timing advance and a UE-specific timing advance based on the re-acquired second configuration related to the first satellite because TS 38.300 teaches that the UE, in order to achieve synchronization with an NTN cell, itself computes the round-trip time between the UE and the uplink time synchronization reference point, and computes it from the UE’s own GNSS position together with the ephemeris and the Common TA parameters that the NTN configuration supplies, so that the timing advance the UE arrives at is made up of the common component that configuration carries and the component the UE derives for its own position (TS 38.300, page 185, §16.14.2.2, “To achieve synchronization, before and during connection to an NTN cell, the UE shall compute the RTT between UE and the RP based on the GNSS position, the ephemeris, and the Common TA parameters”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to compute the timing advance for the NTN cell of TS 38.331 as TS 38.300 prescribes, using the common timing advance and ephemeris that the re-acquired NTN configuration carries. TS 38.300 and TS 38.331 are companion specifications of the same NR release describing the same non-terrestrial access, and TS 38.300 states the timing-advance computation that the parameters of TS 38.331 exist to feed, so applying it to those parameters is the predictable use of a known technique for its intended purpose, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, (Currently Amended) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the first configuration further comprises timer information, and the method further comprises: at the time indicated by the timestamp, starting a timer based on the timer information, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the same NTN configuration that carries the epoch time also carries the validity duration governing how long the UE may rely on that information, and that the UE starts a timer set to that duration from the sub-frame the epoch time designates (TS 38.331, page 690 “A validity duration configured by the network for assistance information (i.e. Serving and/or neighbour satellite ephemeris and Common TA parameters) which indicates the maximum time duration (from epochTime) during which the UE can apply assistance information without having acquired new assistance information.”; TS 38.331, page 60, §5.2.2.4.21 “start or restart T430 for serving cell with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration for the serving cell from the subframe indicated by epochTime for the serving cell”).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 2, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 2, wherein the timer comprises a radio resource control (RRC) timer, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the timer in question is specified by the Radio Resource Control protocol specification itself and that its starting and restarting are prescribed as RRC actions, both on reception of the system information block carrying the NTN configuration and on execution of a reconfiguration with sync (TS 38.331, page 60, §5.2.2.4.21 “start or restart T430 for serving cell with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration for the serving cell from the subframe indicated by epochTime for the serving cell”; TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2 “start timer T430 with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration from the subframe indicated by epochTime, according to the target cell NTN-Config”).
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 2, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 2, wherein: acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises acquiring, from a second satellite, the first configuration related to the first satellite, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the system information the UE receives over the cell it is presently served by, that is, over a second satellite, itself carries the NTN configuration of the neighboring satellite together with that satellite’s carrier frequency and physical cell identity (TS 38.331, page 487 “SIB19 contains satellite assistance information for NTN access.”; TS 38.331, page 488 “Provides a list of NTN neighbor cells including their ntn-Config, carrier frequency and PhysCellId.”).
Furthermore, TS 38.331 discloses the timer is configured to control a validity of uplink synchronization during a connection with the second satellite, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the duration the timer runs is the period over which the UE may continue to apply the satellite assistance information on which its uplink synchronization depends, and that on expiry of that timer while the UE is in connected mode the lower layers are informed that uplink synchronization is lost (TS 38.331, page 690 “A validity duration configured by the network for assistance information (i.e. Serving and/or neighbor satellite ephemeris and Common TA parameters) which indicates the maximum time duration (from epochTime) during which the UE can apply assistance information without having acquired new assistance information.”; TS 38.331, page 61, §5.2.2.6 “if T430 for serving cell expires and if in RRC_CONNECTED”; TS 38.331, page 61, §5.2.2.6 “inform lower layers that UL synchronization is lost”).
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 1, wherein: acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises receiving system information broadcast by the cell, and the system information comprises the first configuration related to the first satellite, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the satellite assistance information for NTN access is carried in a system information block of the cell, and that the NTN configuration within that block supplies the ephemeris, the common timing advance parameters, the validity duration and the epoch (TS 38.331, page 487 “SIB19 contains satellite assistance information for NTN access.”; TS 38.331, page 488 “Provides parameters needed for the UE to access NR via NTN access such as Ephemeris data, common TA parameters, k_offset, validity duration for UL sync information and epoch.”).
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 6, (Currently Amended) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 6, wherein the system information further comprises at least one of a system information block type 1 (SIB1) and a system information block type 19 (SIB19), as TS 38.331 further discloses that the system information block that carries the satellite assistance information constituting the first configuration is system information block type 19, so that at least one of the two recited system information block types is present (TS 38.331, page 487 “SIB19 contains satellite assistance information for NTN access.”; TS 38.331, page 488 “Provides parameters needed for the UE to access NR via NTN access such as Ephemeris data, common TA parameters, k_offset, validity duration for UL sync information and epoch.”).
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, (Currently Amended) TS 38.331 in view of Cheng discloses The method of claim 1, wherein performing, based on the time information, the DL synchronization with the first satellite comprises: receiving a synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first satellite based on the time information, as Cheng further discloses that the timing configuration delivered to the UE for the target satellite cell fixes the periodicity, the offset and the duration of that cell’s synchronization signal blocks, so that when the downlink synchronization of claim 1 is performed on the time information the UE receives those synchronization signal blocks and synchronizes on them (Cheng, para [0069], “It may also provide the RRM information of the target cell, such as the SMTC IE for the SSB periodicity, offset, and duration configuration of the target cell for the NR PSCell and PCell changes.”; Cheng, para [0069], “The UE may synchronize with the target cell and complete the RRC handover procedure by sending an RRCReconfigurationComplete message to target BS 406.”).
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 8, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 8, wherein the time information is associated with the SSB and is in units of subframes, as TS 38.331 further discloses that the epoch time constituting the time information is signaled as a system frame number together with a sub-frame number, that is, in units of sub-frames, and that the target cell to whose downlink the UE synchronizes is identified by the frequency on which its synchronization signal blocks are transmitted (TS 38.331, page 690 “When explicitly provided through SIB, or through dedicated signaling, the EpochTime is the starting time of a DL sub-frame, indicated by a SFN and a sub-frame number signaled together with the assistance information”; TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2 “consider the target SpCell to be one on the SSB frequency indicated by the frequencyInfoDL with a physical cell identity indicated by the physCellId”).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1, (Original) TS 38.331 discloses The method of claim 1, wherein re-acquiring, from the first satellite, the second configuration related to the first satellite comprises: re-acquiring, from the first satellite, the second configuration related to the first satellite after performing the DL synchronization with the first satellite, as TS 38.331 further discloses an ordered sequence in which the UE first begins synchronizing to the downlink of the target satellite cell and only then starts the validity timer from that cell’s epoch time, the UE obtaining the satellite assistance information again before that validity period ends (TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2 “start synchronizing to the DL of the target SpCell”; TS 38.331, page 91, §5.3.5.5.2 “start timer T430 with the timer value set to ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration from the subframe indicated by epochTime, according to the target cell NTN-Config”; TS 38.331, page 60, §5.2.2.4.21 “UE should attempt to re-acquire SIB19 before the end of the duration indicated by ntn-UlSyncValidityDuration and epochTime by UE implementation.”).
Regarding claim 11, (Original) the claim recites: A user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing one or more computer-executable instructions; and at least one processor coupled to the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media, the at least one processor configured to execute the one or more computer-executable instructions to cause the UE to: acquire, from a cell, a first configuration related to a first satellite, the first configuration comprising a timestamp and time information; perform, based on the time information, a downlink (DL) synchronization with the first satellite, starting from a time indicated by the timestamp; re-acquire, from the first satellite, a second configuration related to the first satellite; and calculate a common timing advance and a UE-specific timing advance based on the re-acquired second configuration related to the first satellite. Claim 11 is analogous to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 11, (Currently Amended) the claim recites: The UE of claim 11, wherein: the first configuration further comprises timer information, and the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the UE to: at the time indicated by the timestamp, start a timer based on the timer information. Claim 12 is analogous to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 12, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 12, wherein the timer comprises a radio resource control (RRC) timer. Claim 13 is analogous to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 12, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 12, wherein: acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises acquiring, from a second satellite, the first configuration related to the first satellite, and the timer is configured to control a validity of uplink synchronization during a connection with the second satellite. Claim 14 is analogous to claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 11, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 11, wherein: acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises receiving system information broadcast by the cell, and the system information comprises the first configuration related to the first satellite. Claim 16 is analogous to claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 17, which depends on claim 16, (Currently Amended) the claim recites: The UE of claim 16, wherein the system information further comprises at least one of a system information block type 1 (SIB1) and a system information block type 19 (SIB19). Claim 17 is analogous to claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 18, which depends on claim 11, (Currently Amended) the claim recites: The UE of claim 11, wherein performing, based on the time information, the DL synchronization with the first satellite comprises: receiving a synchronization signal block (SSB) of the first satellite based on the time information. Claim 18 is analogous to claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 18, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 18, wherein the time information is associated with the SSB and is in units of subframes. Claim 19 is analogous to claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, which depends on claim 11, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 11, wherein re-acquiring, from the first satellite, the second configuration related to the first satellite comprises: re-acquiring, from the first satellite, the second configuration related to the first satellite after performing the DL synchronization with the first satellite. Claim 20 is analogous to claim 10 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ETSI TS 38 331 V17.5.0 (2023-07) in view of Cheng (US 2022/0046498 A1) and further in view of ETSI TS 38 300 V17.5.0 (2023-07) and further in view of Yu (US 2022/0240151 A1).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, (Original) in spite of the fact that TS 38.331 in view of Cheng and further in view of TS 38.300 teaches the delivery to the UE, over the cell it is presently served by, of a neighboring satellite’s NTN configuration, and the provision by the source cell of the system information of the satellite cell the UE is switching to: (TS 38.331, page 488; Cheng, para [0069]; TS 38.300, page 180, §16.14.3.1), TS 38.331 in view of Cheng and further in view of TS 38.300 does not explicitly disclose that the first satellite and the second satellite through which that configuration reaches the UE are both associated with one and the same cell.
Nevertheless, TS 38.331 in view of Cheng and further in view of TS 38.300 and further in view of Yu discloses The method of claim 1, wherein acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises: acquiring, from a second satellite, the first configuration related to the first satellite because Yu teaches that the beam of the satellite currently serving the UE carries to the UE the physical cell identity of the beam that the incoming satellite delivers for that same cell, so that the UE is given the incoming satellite’s identifying configuration over the serving satellite (Yu, para [0066], “At the eNodeB 12(A) for cell 51h, the target satellite 20B delivers a new target HO beam 17h with another PCI, while Tx signals on source HO beam 16h provides UEs with target beam 17h PCI for the UE to measure”).
Furthermore, Yu discloses wherein both the first satellite and the second satellite are associated with the cell because Yu teaches that one and the same ground cell is served over two radio paths carried by two different satellites, the two paths differing only in the physical cell identity each carries (Yu, para [0075], “The eNodeB’s two RF ports 12A(1), 12A(2) deliver the ping-pong PCIs to the cell 51h via two RF paths 16h, 17h from two satellites 20A, 20B.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the neighboring-satellite NTN configuration of TS 38.331, delivered to the UE as Cheng describes, in the same-cell two-satellite arrangement that Yu describes. Yu identifies the reason expressly: where the outgoing and incoming satellites carry beams overlaid on one ground cell, the change of serving satellite is handled as a beam change within that cell rather than as a change of cell, which preserves cell continuity and reduces the service interruption the UE experiences when the serving satellite is replaced, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, TS 38.331, Cheng and TS 38.300 are combined for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 11, (Original) the claim recites: The UE of claim 11, wherein acquiring, from the cell, the first configuration related to the first satellite comprises: acquiring, from a second satellite, the first configuration related to the first satellite, wherein both the first satellite and the second satellite are associated with the cell. Claim 15 is analogous to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST
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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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.
/CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights