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
Applicant’s claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) or indicate National Stage entry from a PCT application is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on 11/18/2024 and 04/25/2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species/Group I in the reply filed on 06/04/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Group II claims (40-48) and Group I claims (29-39) are direct correspondences claims and the search effort of either one apparatus would be sufficed without adding a significant burden on the search effort of the other apparatus and yielding highly similar outcomes on the examination determinations. This is not found persuasive because claims in Group I and Group II include different limitations which requires further and different fields of search and further they are related to distinct devices/entities with different functionalities.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Remarks
The present Office Action is based upon the Applicant’s amendment filed on 06/04/2026. Claims 29-48 are now pending in the present application. Claims 40-48 are withdrawn from the consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 29-33 and 36-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAO et al. -US 20260056330 A1- (hereinafter Tao) I view of Khoshkholgh Dashtaki et al. - US 20250220628 A1- (hereinafter Dashtaki).
Regarding claim 29, Tao discloses a terminal apparatus for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal apparatus to (FIG. 1, par. 0040, “The UE 102 is equipped with a transceiver and processing hardware 150 that can include one or more general-purpose processors such as CPUs and non-transitory computer-readable memory storing machine-readable instructions executable on the one or more general-purpose processors, and/or special-purpose processing units”; par. 0071, “Upon receiving 708 the gap pattern, the UE 102 performs measurements within the measurement gap according to the received gap pattern. The UE 102 then determines 713 to terminate the gap earlier (before the end of the gap duration). The UE 102 can make the determination 713 if for example the UE 102 has completed all the necessary measurements, including the measurement of the cell(s) of the satellite 306.”):
in accordance with a determination that a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) positioning measurement of the terminal apparatus is completed in a positioning measurement gap, determine a first time point for a transmission to a non-terrestrial network (NTN) apparatus, of first information indicating the completion of the global navigation satellite system positioning measurement (FIG. 2, FIGs. 8-12 and 15, par. 0071, “The UE 102 then conducts 826 a GNSS position fix procedure during the measurement gap and restarts the gnss-validityDuration timer if the GNSS position fix procedure yields a valid GNSS-based position for the UE 102. The UE 102 starts the GNSS position fix procedure during the measurement gap in a manner to anticipate completing it before the end of the measurement gap”; par. 0077, “the UE 102 initiates 1040 a contention-free random access procedure in order to obtain an UL transmission opportunity. That is, the UE 102 sends to the BS 104, the dedicated PRACH resource (e.g., the dedicated PRACH preamble) indicated in the RRC message the BS transmitted 916 to the UE… the UE 102 may perform 1040 the contention-free random access procedure even before the measurement gap ends 828” the claimed first time is the time UE sends the dedicated PRACH resource (e.g., the dedicated PRACH preamble)).
However, Tao fails to disclose determine whether to start monitoring for control information from the non-terrestrial network apparatus before an end of the global navigation satellite system positioning measurement gap based on at least one of the following: the first time point, a round-trip time (RTT) between the terminal apparatus and the non-terrestrial network apparatus, a processing time required by the non-terrestrial network apparatus for processing the first information, or an offset associated with monitoring the control information.
In the same field of endeavor, Dashtaki discloses determine whether to start monitoring for control information from the non-terrestrial network apparatus before an end of the global navigation satellite system positioning measurement gap based on at least one of the following: the first time point, a round-trip time (RTT) between the terminal apparatus and the non-terrestrial network apparatus, a processing time required by the non-terrestrial network apparatus for processing the first information, or an offset associated with monitoring the control information (par. 0363, “In some other cases, based on a random access response (RAR) window (e.g., ra-ResponseWindow or msgB-ResponseWindow) and/or a contention resolution timer (e.g., ra-ContentionResolution Timer) is running, the wireless device may monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap”; ra-ResponseWindow reads on claimed the first time point and/or a processing time required by the non-terrestrial network apparatus for processing the first information, see par. 0174 for a time window (e.g., ra-ResponseWindow) to monitor a PDCCH, and par. 0180 for the UE may start a time window (e.g., ra-ResponseWindow) to monitor a PDCCH for the RAR).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Dashtaki to the measurement gap as disclosed by Tao for purpose of monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap based on a random access response (RAR) window and/or a contention resolution timer.
Regarding claim 30, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the offset associated with monitoring the control information is defined as a default value, configured by the non- terrestrial network apparatus or reported by the terminal apparatus (the limitation is an optional step and is not considered: "Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation." See MPEP 2103 I.C).
Regarding claim 31, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the terminal apparatus is further caused to: transmit the first information to the non-terrestrial network apparatus (par. 0077, “the UE 102 initiates 1040 a contention-free random access procedure in order to obtain an UL transmission opportunity.”).
Regarding claim 32, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the first information is one of the following: a scheduling request (SR), a buffer status report (BSR),a physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission, or a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (par. 0077 for the UE 102 sends to the BS 104, the dedicated PRACH resource).
Regarding claim 33, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the first information is transmitted on pre-configured resources (par. 0077, “the UE 102 sends to the BS 104, the dedicated PRACH resource (e.g., the dedicated PRACH preamble) indicated in the RRC message the BS transmitted 916 to the UE.”).
However, Tao fails to disclose wherein the control information is carried on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)
Dashtaki wherein the control information is carried on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (par. 0363, “the wireless device may monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Dashtaki to the measurement gap as disclosed by Tao for purpose of monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap based on a random access response (RAR) window and/or a contention resolution timer.
Regarding claim 36, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the terminal apparatus is further caused to: determine the first monitoring occasion of the control information, wherein the first monitoring occasion is after one of the following: a second time point occurring after the duration from the first time point, or the first time point if the first message is transmitted on pre-configured resources (FI. 11, par.0079, “After the measurement gap ends 828 and the UE 102 resumes its cellular communication tasks, the BS 104 then starts providing 1146, 1148, and 1150, to the UE 102, UL transmission opportunities (i.e., UL grants). The UE 102 could have used such an UL transmission opportunity to report a remaining GNSS validity duration”).
Regarding claim 37, as applied to claim 29 above, Tao discloses wherein the terminal apparatus is further caused to: start monitoring for control information after the end of the positioning measurement gap in accordance with a determination that the end of the positioning measurement gap is before a second time point occurring after a duration from the first time point, wherein the duration is determined based on at least one of the following: the RTT, the processing time, or the offset associated with monitoring the control information (FIG. 12, par. 0082, for “After the measurement gap ends 828, the UE 102 resumes its cellular communication tasks. The BS 104 starts providing a number of UL transmission opportunities (e.g., 3) to the UE 102 in the events 1146, 1148, and 1150, after the end of the measurement gap. In this example, upon receiving the 3.sup.rd UL transmission opportunity from the BS 104, the UE 102 transmits 1230 the remaining GNSS validity duration to the BS 104 via an UL DCCH message (e.g., UEassistanceInformation).” Processing time is inherently taught in the 1230 the remaining GNSS validity duration to the BS 104 via an UL DCCH message).
Regarding claim 38, as applied to claim 29 above, Dashtaki discloses wherein the terminal apparatus is further caused to:
receive, from the non-terrestrial network apparatus, second information indicating at least one of the following: a first indication used for enabling or disabling the transmission of the first information before the end of the positioning measurement gap, a second indication used for enabling or disabling monitoring for the control information before the end of the positioning measurement gap, or a third indication used for enabling or disabling monitoring for the control information after the end of the positioning measurement gap and before a second time point occurring after a duration from the first time point (par. 0264, “based on the first configuration parameter being indicated/configured (or being enabled or not being disabled or not being absent from the one or more configuration parameters) and the one or more NTN configuration parameters being invalid (e.g., the UL synchronization of the Serving cell of the one or more Serving Cells being lost), the wireless device may not trigger the positioning measurement gap activation/deactivation request”; par. 0270, 0385).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Dashtaki to the measurement gap as disclosed by Tao for purpose of monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap based on a random access response (RAR) window and/or a contention resolution timer.
Regarding claim 39, as applied to claim 29 above, Dashtaki discloses wherein the terminal apparatus is further caused to: transmit, to the non-terrestrial network second apparatus, third information indicating at least one of the following: first capability-related information indicating whether the terminal apparatus supports the transmission of the first information before the end of the positioning measurement gap, second capability-related information indicating whether the terminal apparatus supports monitoring for the control information before the end of the positioning measurement gap, or third capability-related information indicating whether the terminal apparatus supports monitoring for the control information after the end of the positioning measurement gap and a second time point occurring after a duration from the first time point (par. 0245; par. 0271, “the wireless device may transmit a UE capability message to the base station. For example, the UE capability of the wireless device may indicate a capability of the wireless device for performing the one or more measurements when the UL synchronization of a Serving Cell is lost (e.g., due to the expiry of a validity timer of the Serving Cell and/or invalidity of the one or more configuration parameters). In some other cases, the UE capability message may indicate a capability of the wireless device for automatically deactivating the (activated) positioning measurement gap”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Dashtaki to the measurement gap as disclosed by Tao for purpose of monitor PDCCH during the activated positioning measurement gap based on a random access response (RAR) window and/or a contention resolution timer.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 29-39 provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 29-39 of copending Application No. 19227244 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Khoshkholgh Dashtaki et al. -US 20260143463 A1- disclose Positioning In Non-terrestrial Networks.
Watts et al. -US 20260072179 A1- disclose GLOBAL NAVIGATION SATELLITE SYSTEM (GNSS) REPORTING FOR REDUCED CAPABILITY DEVICES.
Cui et al. -US 20250330928 A1- disclose PARALLEL MEASUREMENT GAP ENHANCEMENT IN NON-TERRESTRIAL NETWORKS.
TAO et al. -US 20250097866 A1- disclose MEASUREMENT GAP MANAGEMENT IN A NON-TERRESTRIAL NETWORK.
MEDEIROS DE AMORIM et al. -US 20240283571 A1- disclose MANAGEMENT OF MEASUREMENT GAP SIGNALING.
TANG et al. -US 20240085569 A1- disclose CONDITIONS ON TRIGGERING GNSS POSITION FIX.
CHENG et al. -US 20220330187 A1- disclose USER EQUIPMENT AND METHOD FOR TIMING ALIGNMENT.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N whose telephone number is (571)270-1772. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 p.m.
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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571)272-7915. 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.
/ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights