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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 02/20/2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niemi (WO 2024222758 A1) in view of Chiba et al. (WO2025150349A1).
Regarding claim 1, Niemi teaches a method for a User Equipment (UE) (scenario 300 of an enhanced NAS procedure with a satellite in the S&F operation mode, Figs. 3A-B, [0027]), comprising:
initiating a first procedure to a first network, wherein the first procedure is an attach, tracking area update (TAU) procedure, or a service request procedure (UE initiates the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH, step 302, [0027]);
receiving a configuration of a wait time for a Store and Forward (S&F) operation (the first satellite rejects the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message to the UE, and the REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message includes at least a new reject cause (e.g., for indicating that the NAS procedure is not completed due to S&F operation) and a re-attempt assistance information (i.e., an indication for assisting the UE on subsequent re-attempts or resumptions of the NAS procedure) . In this scenario, the re-attempt assistance information includes a value of a timer for indicating when the UE is allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure, step 303, [0028]);
starting a first timer based on the wait time, wherein the UE is prohibited to initiate the first procedure to the first network for the S&F operation when the first timer is running (UE suspends/terminates the initial registration/attach procedure, and starts the timer with the value and the UE is not allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure before the timer expires, step 304, [0029]); and
wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure (UE re-attempts or resumes the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUEST message, step 308, [0030]).
However, Niemi does not clearly teach initiating a second procedure in a cell of a second network; and stopping the first timer when the first timer is running if the UE successfully completes the second procedure, wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure.
In an analogous art, Chiba teaches teach initiating a second procedure in a cell of a second network (Also, if the UE is still in the same satellite communication area after the timer expires, it may start MO data transmission or signaling, or if it finds a cell of another TN or NTN, it may stop the timer and register via the new access network and transmit MO data, page 13); and stopping the first timer when the first timer is running if the UE successfully completes the second procedure (UE may stop the T3580 timer based on receiving a PDU session establishment rejection or acceptance message from the SMF. Here, if the UE does not receive a PDU session establishment rejection or acceptance message before the expiration of T3580, the UE may send a PDU session establishment request message to the SMF again, page 21), wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure (PDU session establishment procedure, page 21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the store and forward method of Niemi with the timer of Chiba to provide an overload control in the discontinuous coverage provided by NR satellite access, and/or a maximum waiting time for overload control in the discontinuous coverage, and/or a discontinuous coverage wait timer value for overload control in the discontinuous coverage as suggested, Chiba page 10.
Regarding claim 2, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the configuration of the wait time is included in a response message of the first procedure (the first satellite rejects the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message to the UE, and the REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message includes at least a new reject cause (e.g., for indicating that the NAS procedure is not completed due to S&F operation) and a re-attempt assistance information (i.e., an indication for assisting the UE on subsequent re-attempts or resumptions of the NAS procedure) . In this scenario, the re-attempt assistance information includes a value of a timer for indicating when the UE is allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure, step 303, [0028]).
Regarding claim 3, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first procedure is for S&F operation (within the REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUEST message, the UE may include its capability information indicating the UE’s ability to handle S&F operations, step 302, [0027]).
Regarding claim 4, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the second procedure is for normal service or not for S&F operation (UE re-attempts or resumes the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUESTmessage, [0030]).
Regarding claim 5, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first network is a satellite cell in S&F operation of a first Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) (e.g. NTN cell Niemi Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the second network is not a satellite cell in S&F operation of the first PLMN (the third satellite also gets connected to the GS via the feeder link and the E-UTRAN AVs for the subscriber/UE are also uploaded to the third satellite, given that the third satellite is expected to fly over the area where the UE may re-attempt/resume the initial registration/attach procedure after the timer expires, [0030]).
Regarding claim 7, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first network is indicated by a list of satellite Identifications (IDs), and/or wherein the list of satellite IDs indicates one or more satellites over which the UE may not re-attempt the first procedure when the first timer is running (the re-attempt assistance information indicates a number of satellites in sequence that the UE needs to wait before re-attempting or resuming the NAS procedure, the UE may determine to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure only in a satellite with the number of satellites next to the satellite where the NAS procedure is rejected, [0032]).
Regarding claim 9, Niemi t as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1. Niemi teaches wherein the second network is a satellite cell in normal service and/or a Terrestrial Network (TN) (NTN network of Niemi Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the UE is allowed to initiate the first procedure to the first network after the first timer is expired (In step 306, the timer expires on the UE. From this point on, the UE knows that the initial registration/attach procedure can be re-attempted or resumed in any upcoming satellite cell of the PLMN, [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Niemi teaches a User Equipment (UE) (UE of Fig. 5 performing method of Figs. 3A-3B), comprising: a memory (memory 51); and a processor operatively coupled with the memory (processor 512), wherein the processor is configured to execute a program code to:
initiate a first procedure to a first network, wherein the first procedure is an attach, tracking area update (TAU) procedure, or a service request procedure (UE initiates the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH, step 302, [0027]);
receive a configuration of a wait time for a Store and Forward (S&F) operation (the first satellite rejects the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message to the UE, and the REGISTRATION/ATTACH REJECT message includes at least a new reject cause (e.g., for indicating that the NAS procedure is not completed due to S&F operation) and a re-attempt assistance information (i.e., an indication for assisting the UE on subsequent re-attempts or resumptions of the NAS procedure) . In this scenario, the re-attempt assistance information includes a value of a timer for indicating when the UE is allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure, step 303, [0028]);
start a first timer based on the wait time, wherein the UE is prohibited to initiate the first procedure to the first network for the S&F operation when the first timer is running (UE suspends/terminates the initial registration/attach procedure, and starts the timer with the value and the UE is not allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure before the timer expires, step 304, [0029]).
wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure (UE re-attempts or resumes the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUEST message, step 308, [0030]).
However, Niemi does not clearly teach initiating a second procedure in a cell of a second network; and stopping the first timer when the first timer is running if the UE successfully completes the second procedure, wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure.
In an analogous art, Chiba teaches teach initiating a second procedure in a cell of a second network (Also, if the UE is still in the same satellite communication area after the timer expires, it may start MO data transmission or signaling, or if it finds a cell of another TN or NTN, it may stop the timer and register via the new access network and transmit MO data, page 13); and stopping the first timer when the first timer is running if the UE successfully completes the second procedure (UE may stop the T3580 timer based on receiving a PDU session establishment rejection or acceptance message from the SMF. Here, if the UE does not receive a PDU session establishment rejection or acceptance message before the expiration of T3580, the UE may send a PDU session establishment request message to the SMF again, page 21), wherein the second procedure is an attach, TAU procedure, or a service request procedure (PDU session establishment procedure, page 21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the store and forward method of Niemi with the timer of Chiba to provide an overload control in the discontinuous coverage provided by NR satellite access, and/or a maximum waiting time for overload control in the discontinuous coverage, and/or a discontinuous coverage wait timer value for overload control in the discontinuous coverage as suggested, Chiba page 10.
Regarding claim 12, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 11, wherein the configuration of the wait time is included in a response message of the first procedure (e.g., for indicating that the NAS procedure is not completed due to S&F operation) and a re-attempt assistance information (i.e., an indication for assisting the UE on subsequent re-attempts or resumptions of the NAS procedure) . In this scenario, the re-attempt assistance information includes a value of a timer for indicating when the UE is allowed to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure, step 303, [0028]).
Regarding claim 13, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 11, wherein the first procedure is for S&F operation (within the REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUEST message, the UE may include its capability information indicating the UE’s ability to handle S&F operations, step 302, [0027]).
Regarding claim 14, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 11, wherein the second procedure is for normal service or not for S&F operation (UE re-attempts or resumes the initial registration/attach procedure by transmitting a REGISTRATION/ATTACH REQUESTmessage, [0030]).
Regarding claim 15, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 11, wherein the first network is a satellite cell in S&F operation of a first Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) (NTN network of Niemi Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 16, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 15, wherein the second network is not a satellite cell in S&F operation of the first PLMN (the third satellite also gets connected to the GS via the feeder link and the E-UTRAN AVs for the subscriber/UE are also uploaded to the third satellite, given that the third satellite is expected to fly over the area where the UE may re-attempt/resume the initial registration/attach procedure after the timer expires, [0030]).
Regarding claim 17, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 11, wherein the first network is indicated by a list of satellite Identifications (IDs), and/or wherein the list of satellite IDs indicates one or more satellites over which the UE may not re-attempt the first procedure when the first timer is running (the re-attempt assistance information indicates a number of satellites in sequence that the UE needs to wait before re-attempting or resuming the NAS procedure, the UE may determine to re-attempt or resume the NAS procedure only in a satellite with the number of satellites next to the satellite where the NAS procedure is rejected, [0032]).
Regarding claim 19, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of The UE of wherein the second network is a satellite cell in normal service and/or a Terrestrial Network (TN) (NTN network of Niemi Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 20, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 1I. Niemi further teaches wherein the UE is allowed to initiate the first procedure to the first network after the first timer is expired (In step 306, the timer expires on the UE. From this point on, the UE knows that the initial registration/attach procedure can be re-attempted or resumed in any upcoming satellite cell of the PLMN, [0030]).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niemi in view of as Chiba and further in view of Niemi et al. (US 20240014886 A1)(Hereinafter Niemi886).
Regarding claim 8, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the method of claim.
However, Niemi and Chiba do not teach Niemi further teaches wherein the second network is a second PLMN.
In an analogous art, Niemi886 teaches wherein the second network is a second PLMN (UE 110 may start (or auto-start) the same procedure when a corresponding suitable cell (from the same or different public land mobile network (PLMN) or from the same or different tracking area (TA)) is available again, Niemi [0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the store and forward method of Niemi and Chiba with the PLMN of Niemi886 to provide a method to improvement to signaling over satellite access in mobile communications as suggested, Niemi [0006].
Regarding claim 18, Niemi as modified by Chiba teaches the UE of claim 17.
However, Niemi and Chiba do not teach Niemi further teaches wherein the second network is a second PLMN.
In an analogous art, Niemi886 teaches wherein the second network is a second PLMN (UE 110 may start (or auto-start) the same procedure when a corresponding suitable cell (from the same or different public land mobile network (PLMN) or from the same or different tracking area (TA)) is available again, Niemi [0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the store and forward method of Niemi and Chiba with the PLMN of Niemi886 to provide a method to improvement to signaling over satellite access in mobile communications as suggested, Niemi [0006].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wiedeman et al. (US 20020039900 A1): A method for operating a communication system includes steps of: (a) receiving a call for a user terminal at a satellite system gateway, the call originating from another user terminal; (b) examining a database to determine if the called user terminal is located within a coverage area of the satellite system gateway; and (c) if yes, formulating a paging message and transmitting the paging message to the called user terminal via at least one satellite.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS whose telephone number is (571)270-0671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643