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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/22/25 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to amendment filed on 9/22/25. Claims 1, 6, 27-29, 35, 40, and 43-59 are currently pending.
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 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, 6, 27-29, 35, 40, and 43-59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuang et al. (EP 3528538 A1) in view of Jiang (US 2021/0105776), and further in view of GUO et al. (US 2022/0256436).
Regarding claim 1, Kuang teaches a method comprising:
sending, by a first base station to a second base station associated with a bandwidth part (BWP), one or more messages comprising:
an indication of a handover (handover request message), from a first cell of the first base station (source base station) to a second cell of the second base station (target base station) [message 1, Figs. 4-6, 8], of a wireless device is configured to maintain connection with the first base station for a duration after reception of a handover command (see “Referring to Fig. 2B, another exemplary scenario is shown where a mobile terminal is (again) configured with plural bandwidth parts in the source and target cell, i.e. before and after handover” [par 43] and “This is particularly so if the handover request message (see message 1 - Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 8) additionally includes information regarding at least a third and a different fourth bandwidth part which are configured in the source base station and/or information regarding the activated one of the configured at least third and fourth bandwidth part in the source base station” [par 177] which suggests that the UE “is configured to maintain connection with the first base station for a duration after reception of a handover command” since the BWPs configured for the UE are active before and after handover); and
configuration information of a plurality of BWPs of the first cell, wherein the configuration information comprises an indication of an index associated with an active BWP (see “This is particularly so if the handover request message (see message 1 - Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 8) additionally includes information regarding at least a third and a different fourth bandwidth part which are configured in the source base station and/or information regarding the activated one of the configured at least third and fourth bandwidth part in the source base station” [par 177] and “where the bandwidth part index indexes that bandwidth part which is the same as the previously activated one of the configured bandwidth part in the source base station” [par 180] which suggests the “third” and “fourth” read on an “index associated with an active BWP” since it indexes a bandwidth part activated in the source base station).
Kuang does not explicitly teach after sending the one or more messages and during the handover from the first base station to the second base station, sending from the first base station to the wireless device via the active BWP, downlink signals. In an analogous prior art reference, Jiang teaches after sending a message (configuration information), sending from the first base station to the wireless device via an active BWP, downlink signals (see “configuration information sent by the base station is received, and the configuration information is configured to configure the terminal to keep the first BWP that is presently activated on the carrier in the active state and activate the second BWP on the carrier after determining to perform the BWP switching” [par 53] and “In step 101, after determining that the terminal needs to perform BWP switching, a first BWP that is presently activated on a carrier is kept in an active state. When a BWP is in the active state, the terminal may receive and/or send data on the BWP” [par 36] which in combination suggests that the terminal may receive “downlink signals from the first base station” when the first BWP is in the active state). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Kuang to allow after sending the at least message during the handover from the first base station to the second base station, sending from the first base station to the wireless device via the active BWP, downlink signals, as taught by Jiang, in order for the first base station to maintain connection with the wireless device and send data on the active BWP if needed.
The combination of Kuang and Jiang does not explicitly teach receiving, by the first base station, from the second base station, and after sending the downlink signals, a release message, wherein the first base station is configured to maintain a connection with the wireless device until the release message is received by the first base station. In an analogous prior art reference, Guo teaches receiving, by a first base station (Source cell), from a second base station (Target cell), and after sending downlink signals (see Fig. 12 Data sent from Source cell to UE between steps 7 and 8), a release message (UE context release), wherein the first base station is configured to maintain a connection with the wireless device until the release message is received by the first base station (see “Upon reception of the UE CONTEXT RELEASE message, the source eNB can release radio and C-plane related resources associated to the UE context” [par 53] which suggests that the connection with the UE is maintained “until the release message is received by the first base station”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kuang and Jiang to allow receiving, by the first base station, from the second base station, and after sending the downlink signals, a release message, wherein the first base station is configured to maintain a connection with the wireless device until the release message is received by the first base station, as taught by Kuo, in order to release related resources with the wireless device after successful handover to the second base station.
Regarding claim 6, Kuang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending, from the first base station and to the wireless device, a radio resource control (RRC) message indicating an identifier of the active BWP (see handover command in Figs. 4-6 and 8 which in the embodiment described in paragraphs 177-180 would include BWPs configured by the target base station which are the same (or similar) to BWPs configured in the source base station).
Regarding claim 27, Kuang teaches wherein the duration comprises a time between sending the handover command and the second base station receiving a connection reconfiguration complete message (see “Referring to Fig. 2B, another exemplary scenario is shown where a mobile terminal is (again) configured with plural bandwidth parts in the source and target cell, i.e. before and after handover” [par 43] which suggests the mobile terminal maintains connection with the source base station after handover).
Regarding claim 28, Kuang teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the indication of the handover comprises a handover command (see “The source base station 200-a then forwards the information from this handover (request) acknowledge message to the mobile terminal 100. This information is conveyed in form of a handover command message (see message 3 in Fig. 1)” [par 66]).
Claims 29 and 40 recite subject matter similar to claim 1 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 35 and 51 recite subject matter similar to claim 6 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 43, Kuang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending, based on successful completion of the handover from the first base station to the second base station, information associated with switching, from the active BWP to the BWP (see “Then at a later stage, as will be detailed next, the mobile terminal can notify the selection of the first activated bandwidth to the target base station by the method of RACH resource or PUSCH resource differentiation” [par 78] which suggests that the mobile terminal sends “information associated with switching, from the active BWP to the BWP” since the selected BWP is configured by the target base station).
Regarding claim 44, Kuang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending, to the wireless device, a second message indicating the handover, wherein the first base station maintains connection with the wireless device for the duration after sending the second message (see “Assuming for the sake of example that the mobile terminal 100 is only capable of communicating over 20 a single and not plural bandwidth parts, then the target base station 200-b will refrain from configuring more than one bandwidth part for the mobile terminal 100” [par 57] which suggests a “second message indicating the handover” because the handover command may indicate a single configured BWP which is distinct from the “message indicating handover” which comprises a plurality of configured BWPs).
Regarding claim 45, Kuang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
sending, by the first base station to the second base station, an indication of a capability to support handover, from the first cell of the first base station to the second cell of the second base station, of the wireless device that maintains connection with the first base station for the duration after reception of the handover command (see “A transceiver 220-b of the target base station 200-b receives from the source base station 200-the handover request message. Particular, this message includes (among others) information regarding the capability of the mobile terminal 100 to communicate over at least two different bandwidth parts, i.e. a first bandwidth part BWP#0 and a second bandwidth part BWP#1 in the uplink and downlink” [par 56] and “Referring to Fig. 2B, another exemplary scenario is shown where a mobile terminal is (again) configured with plural bandwidth parts in the source and target cell, i.e. before and after handover” [par 43] which in combination suggests that the capability to communicate over at least two different bandwidth parts may be for the source and target cells).
Regarding claim 46, Kuang teaches the first base station of claim 29, wherein the duration comprises a time between sending the handover command and the second base station receiving a connection reconfiguration complete message (see “Referring to Fig. 2B, another exemplary scenario is shown where a mobile terminal is (again) configured with plural bandwidth parts in the source and target cell, i.e. before and after handover” [par 43]).
Claims 47 and 53 recite subject matter similar to claim 28 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 48 and 52 recite subject matter similar to claim 43 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 49 and 55 recite subject matter similar to claim 44 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 50 and 56 recite subject matter similar to claim 45 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 54 recites subject matter similar to claim 46 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 57, Kuang teaches wherein the active BWP overlaps with the BWP associated with the second base station (see “This is particularly so if the handover request message (see message 1 - Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 8) additionally includes information regarding at least a third and a different fourth bandwidth part which are configured in the source base station and/or information regarding the activated one of the configured at least third and fourth bandwidth part in the source base station” [par 177] and “More specifically, the target base station can configure the first bandwidth part same (or similar) as the third bandwidth part and the second bandwidth part same (or similar) as the fourth bandwidth part” [par 178] which suggests that the third and fourth bandwidth parts, or “active BWP”, “overlaps the first and second bandwidth parts of the target base station which reads on the claimed “overlaps with the BWP associated with the second base station” because the bandwidth parts are the same (or similar)).
Claims 58 and 59 recite subject matter similar to claim 57 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 6, 27-29, 35, 40, and 43-59 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nam T Huynh whose telephone number is (571)272-5970. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/NAM T HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647