DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on December 23, 2024; June 23, 2025 and August 27, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on December 23, 2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Double Patenting
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following reasons:
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising: a processor configured to:
receive, via broadcast signaling, configuration information indicating a same-physical cell identity (PCI) satellite switch from a first satellite to a second satellite (col. 44, lines 61-63);
suspend uplink transmission with the first satellite in response to the same-PCI satellite switch (col. 45, lines 3-4); and
perform the same-PCI satellite switch to the second satellite based on the configuration information indicating the same-PCI satellite switch (col. 45, lines 5-7).
Regarding claim 2, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites wherein the configuration information comprises an indication of a start time and an indication of an end time for the same-PCI satellite switch from the first satellite to the second satellite (col. 44, lines 64-67).
Regarding claim 3, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites, wherein the processor is configured to start a resynchronization for the same-PCI satellite switch based on the configuration information (col. 45, lines 1-2).
Claims 4-10 correspond to claim 2-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417.
Regarding claim 11, claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the method comprising:
receiving, via broadcast signaling, configuration information indicating a same-physical cell identity (PCI) satellite switch from a first satellite to a second satellite (col. 45, line 41 – col. 46, line 5);
suspending uplink transmission with the first satellite in response to the same-PCI satellite switch (col. 46, lines 8-9); and
performing the same-PCI satellite switch to the second satellite based on the configuration information indicating the same-PCI satellite switch (col. 46, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 12, claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites wherein the configuration information comprises an indication of a start time and an indication of an end time for the same-PCI satellite switch from the first satellite to the second satellite (col. 46, lines 25).
Regarding claim 13, claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417 recites, further comprising starting a resynchronization for the same-PCI satellite switch based on the configuration information (col. 46, lines 6-7).
Claims 14-20 correspond to claim 10-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,417.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura et al. (hereinafter “Uemura”, US 2025/0357999) in view of Lauridsen et al. (hereinafter “Lauridsen”, US 2023/0072679).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Uemura discloses a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (i.e., terminal apparatus 10 as shown in Fig. 2) comprising:
a processor (i.e., processing unit 11 as shown in Fig. 2) configured to:
receive, configuration information indicating a same-physical cell identity (PCI) satellite switch from a first satellite to a second satellite (i.e., receiving control information includes time information related to switching time from the first satellite to a second satellite, and information indicating that the first cell and the second cell have the same physical cell IDs as described in abstract, paragraphs 0010, 0023, 0081-0082, and as shown in Fig. 6);
suspend uplink transmission with the first satellite in response to the same-PCI satellite switch (i.e., suspending the uplink transmission in response to detecting cell switching in S4 as described in paragraphs 0086 and 0093); and
perform the same-PCI satellite switch to the second satellite based on the configuration information indicating the same-PCI satellite switch (i.e., performing the switch over from the first satellite to the second satellite as shown in Fig. 6).
Uemura, however, does not expressly disclose receive, via broadcast signaling, configuration information.
In a similar endeavor, Lauridsen discloses random access procedure selection. Lauridsen also discloses receive, via broadcast signaling, configuration information (i.e., the configuration message is received at the UE comprises an RA preamble index and/or PRACH occasion as described in paragraphs 0151-0157).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to enable the UE to establish a connection with the network.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the configuration information comprises an indication of a start time and an indication of an end time for the same-PCI satellite switch from the first satellite to the second satellite (i.e., the start and end time as described in paragraphs 0084 and 0090).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the processor is configured to start a resynchronization for the same-PCI satellite switch based on the configuration information (i.e., resynchronization as described in paragraphs 0094-0096).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the processor is configured to perform the same-PCT satellite switch during a time period associated with the resynchronization (i.e., the UE acquires synchronization of the downlink signal and performs control based on switching timing as described in paragraphs 0086-0090).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the processor is configured to start the resynchronization based on the indication of the start time and the indication of the end time for the same-PCI satellite switch (i.e., the timing is based on the cell switching notification information received from the first cell or the basis of the UL validity time included in the system information received from the first cell as described in paragraph 0089).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the processor is configured to perform one or more resynchronization procedures in response to the same-PCI satellite switch (i.e., performing resynchronization procedure in S8 of Fig. 6 and as described in paragraph 0096).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the one or more resynchronization procedures comprise a timing advance calculation, a doppler compensation, a power control procedure, or a measurement procedure (i.e., using timing advance as described in paragraph 0097).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations as recited within claims as described above. Uemura also discloses wherein the processor is configured to transmit assistance information that comprises a resynchronization duration, an indication that the WTRU can perform a synchronization procedure prior to the same-PCI satellite switch, and an indication of a time that the WTRU can resume communication with the second satellite after the same-PCI satellite switch (i.e., using the cell configuration information assigned in a dedicated manner in the first cell as is in the uplink resynchronization as described in paragraph 0096).
Claim(s) 9-10 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura in view of Lauridsen and further in view of Ji et al. as cited in IDS dated December 23, 2024 (hereinafter “Ji”, US 2024/0179591).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Uemura and Lauridsen disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above but do not expressly disclose features of these claims.
In a similar endeavor, Ji discloses an efficient configuring of a non-terrestrial network connection. Ji also discloses wherein the processor is configured to receive a configuration for the resynchronization that comprises a condition to declare resynchronization failure or resources to indicate successful resynchronization to the second satellite (i.e., the UE receives set of connection configurations as described in paragraphs 0075, 0093, 0108 and 0121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to ensure the UE to be able to connect to a network successfully.
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Uemura, Lauridsen and Ji disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Ji also discloses wherein the processor is configured to transmit a resynchronization successful indication in response to successful resynchronization to the second satellite (i.e., the UE transmits an indication that it applies the switching as described in paragraphs 0122-0123).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE CAI whose telephone number is (571)272-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, KATHY WANG-HURST can be reached on (571)270-5371. 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.
/Wayne H Cai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights