DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 13, 16-17, 19, 43-44, 47-48, 50, and 52 have been amended; Claims 1-12, 15, 18, 21-42, 46, and 49 have been canceled; No claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 13-14, 16-17, 19-20, 43-45, 47-48, 50-52 are subject to examination.
Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to claims 17 and 48 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 17 and 48. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 17 and 48 is/are hereby withdrawn.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 17-20, 43, and 48-52 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 Objections
Claims 13, 17, 44, and 48 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 13 and 44 recite “calculating a moving distance” and “determining whether a moving distance”. It is not clear whether the two moving distances are the same or different. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as the same moving distance. Claims 14 and 16 and Claims 45 and 47 are objected to as being, respectively, dependent on claims 13 and 44.
Claim 17 and 48 recites “first base station” “a second base station”, “the base station”, and “another base station”. It is unclear whether the first base station, second base station, the base station, and another base stations are all different base stations. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret “the first base station” and “the base station” as the same base station and “a second base station” and “another base station” as the same base station. Claims 19-20 and 43 and Claims 50-52 are objected to as being, respectively, dependent on claims 17 and 48.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 13-14 and 44-45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DEENOO et al. (US. US 20200154326 A1), hereby referred to DEENOO, in view of CHANG et al. (US 20210337443 A1) (see 892 10/15/2024), and in view of ODE (US 20150124780 A1).
Claim 13:
DEENOO teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving, by the UE a message of handover command (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 406 (“Conditional Reconfig (forCell2)”) and para 78 (“…WTRU may receive a RRC connection reconfiguration with…one or more conditional mobility IEs...timer…”) a message of handover command); determining whether the timer as expired (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 408 (“Validity Timer”) wherein a timer is determined to be running); in response to the timer not expiring, determining a condition during an active period of the timer (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 411 (“Cell2 satisfies Trigger Condition”) wherein the WTRU determines that a condition is satisfied during the running of the timer); and handover, by the UE, from the base station to another base station based on the message when the timer expires and in response to the condition before the timer expires (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 416 (“Validity Expiry”) and item 422 (“Perform RA Using Contention Based Resource Attempt: n+1”) wherein a handover based on the message of handover command happens after the timer expires in the event that a condition is satisfied before the timer expires).
However, DEENOO does not explicitly disclose a timer configuration, wherein the timer configuration comprises a timer and an initialization instruction configured to cause the UE to automatically initialize a handover procedure; determining whether an average speed of the UE is less than a threshold; and handovering in response to the average speed of the UE being less than the threshold.
CHANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a timer configuration (CHANG: para 56 (“The handover condition validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message, such as a first RRC message including a handover command.”) wherein the first RRC message includes a timer configuration), wherein the timer configuration comprises a timer and an initialization instruction configured to cause the UE to automatically initialize a handover procedure (CHANG: FIG. 3 item 301 (“Receive a first handover command including a first handover condition”), this handover command includes a first handover condition and para 2 (“…UE is configured to perform a handover according to the previously received handover command when a certain condition is met…”) wherein a handover command is an instruction for the UE to decide for itself when to start a handover; and para 56 (“The handover condition validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message, such as a first RRC message including a handover command.”) wherein the RRC message contains timer configuration as the configuration includes a timer/validity timer and initialization instructions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DEENOO with CHANG, the combination hereby referred to as DEE-CHANG, for the benefit of increasing success rate of a handover command so as to avoid service interruption delay (CHANG para 2).
While DEE-CHANG teaches in response to the timer not expiring, determining a condition during an active period of the timer and determining whether the condition is satisfied during the active period of the timer (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 411 (“Cell2 satisfies Trigger Condition”) wherein the WTRU determines that a condition is satisfied during the running of the timer), DEE-CHANG does not explicitly disclose calculating a moving distance of the UE based on locations of the UE; determining whether a moving distance of the UE is less than a threshold; and handovering in response to the moving distance of the UE being less than the threshold.
ODE, in the same field of endeavor, teaches calculating a moving distance of the UE based on locations of the UE (ODE: FIG. 8 item S5 (“Calculate Distance L”) and para 62 (“At Step S4…mobile station 10 measures the current location of the mobile station…”) based on the location of the UE, the UE’s moving distance from the target base station is calculated) ; determining whether a moving distance of the UE is less than a threshold (ODE: FIG. 8 item S6 (“L≤Lth1”) wherein the moving distance is less than a threshold); and handovering in response to the moving distance of the UE being less than the threshold (ODE: para 68 (“Then, a handover is performed if the distance between the mobile station 10 and the femto base station 20 becomes a value equal to or less than the above described distance threshold…”) wherein handover is performed in response to moving distance being less than threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DEE-CHANG with ODE, the combination hereby referred to as DEE-CHANG-ODE, for the benefit of saving power and reducing interference (ODE: para 8).
Claim 14:
DEE-CHANG-ODE teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the timer starts when the UE receives the message (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 406 (“Conditional Reconfig (forCell2)”) and item 408 (“Validity Timer”) wherein the timer starts when the UE receives the message) including the timer (CHANG: para 56 (“The handover condition validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message, such as a first RRC message including a handover command.”) wherein the message includes the timer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DEENOO and ODE with CHANG for the benefit of increasing success rate of a handover command so as to avoid service interruption delay (CHANG para 2).
Claim 44:
DEENOO teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory (DEENOO: FIG. 1B item 130-132 the memory); and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (DEENOO: FIG. 1b item 118 the processor). For further limitations, see rejection for claim 13 above.
Claim 45:
DEE-CHANG-ODE teaches the UE of claim 44. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 14 above.
Claim(s) 16 and 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DEENOO in view of CHANG and ODE, the combination hereby referred to as DEENOO-CHANG-ODE, and in further view of PARK et al. (US 20180279186 A1) (see 892 10/15/2024), hereby referred to as PARK.
Claim 16:
DEENOO-CHANG-ODE teaches the method of claim 13, wherein handover is performed when a condition is met (DEENOO: FIG. 4 item 411 (“Cell2 satisfies Trigger Condition”) wherein the WTRU determines that a condition is satisfied during the running of the timer), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the handover is performed when an average speed of the UE is less than a threshold during the active period of the timer.
PARK, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the handover is performed when an average speed of the UE is less than a threshold during the active period of the timer (PARK: para 248 (“The one or more handover triggering condition may comprise…a determination that a moving speed of a wireless device is slower than a threshold speed value…”) and para 350 (“…to the wireless device for handover to target base station…”) wherein an average speed/moving speed of the UE being less than a threshold is trigger for a handover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DEE-CHANG with PARK, the combination hereby referred to as DEE-CHANG-PARK, for the benefit of faster handover with reduced latency and collisions (PARK: para 321).
Claim 47:
DEE-CHANG-ODE teaches the UE of claim 44. For further limitations, see rejections for claim 16 above.
Claim(s) 17, 43, 48, and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHANG in view of ODE, and in further view of YUN et al. (US 20200178135 A1) (See 892 11/15/2023) (See Priority Document KR10-20180158560 FIG. 4-8).
Claim 17:
CHANG teaches a method performed by a first base station, the method comprising: calculating a timer based on a timing of when a user equipment (UE) leaves a signal coverage of the first base station and a timing of when the UE enters a signal coverage of a second base station (CHANG: FIG. 1 and para 77 (“The handover configuration validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message… including a handover command. The configuration of the validity timer includes a value of the timer.”) wherein a value of the timer is configured based on determining that UE is, at this time, leaving a first base station and entering a second base station in a handover procedure) transmitting, by the base station, a handover message comprising a timer configuration to a user equipment (UE) (CHANG: para 56 (“The handover condition validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message, such as a first RRC message including a handover command.”) wherein the first RRC message includes a timer configuration), wherein the timer configuration comprises the calculated timer and an initialization instruction configured to cause the UE to automatically initialize a handovering procedure (CHANG: FIG. 3 item 301 (“Receive a first handover command including a first handover condition”), this handover command includes a first handover condition and para 2 (“…UE is configured to perform a handover according to the previously received handover command when a certain condition is met…”) wherein a handover command is an instruction for the UE to decide for itself when to start a handover; and para 56 (“The handover condition validity timer is configured by the base station using an RRC message, such as a first RRC message including a handover command.”) wherein the RRC message contains timer configuration as the configuration includes a timer/validity timer and initialization instructions), and wherein the timer configuration causes the UE to perform a handover from the base station to another base station based on the handover message in response to the timer not expiring and in response to a condition being satisfied during an active period of the timer (CHANG: para 9 (“…starting a first handover configuration validity timer corresponding to the first handover configuration, wherein when the first handover condition is met, the user equipment performs the first handover condition corresponding to the first handover condition…”) and para 12 (“if the handover condition is meth, then a handover is performed, and the first handover configuration validity timer is stopped”) wherein handover is performed based on a condition meeting when the timer is still running/not expiring).
While CHANG teaches in response to a condition being satisfied during an active period of the timer (CHANG: para 12 (“if the handover condition is meth, then a handover is performed, and the first handover configuration validity timer is stopped”) wherein handover is performed based on a condition meeting when the timer is still running/not expiring), CHANG does not explicitly disclose in response to a moving distance of the UE being less than a threshold during an active period of the timer.
ODE, in the same field of endeavor, teaches in response to a moving distance of the UE being less than the threshold (ODE: para 68 (“Then, a handover is performed if the distance between the mobile station 10 and the femto base station 20 becomes a value equal to or less than the above described distance threshold…”) wherein handover is performed in response to moving distance being less than threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the condition being satisfied during an active period of the timer of CHANG with the condition of a moving distance being less than the threshold of ODE, the combination hereby referred to as CHANG-ODE, for the benefit of saving power and reducing interference (ODE: para 8).
However, CHANG-ODE does not explicitly disclose the first base station disposed on a first satellite and a second base station disposed on a second satellite.
YUN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the first base station disposed on a first satellite and a second base station disposed on a second satellite (FIG. 8-11 wherein handover is performed between base stations on satellites).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHANG-ODE with YUN, the combination hereby referred to as CHANG-ODE-YUN, for the benefit of reducing disruption in network communication (YUN: para 3).
Claim 43:
CHANG-ODE-YUN teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising: transmitting, by the first base station, a handover request to the second base station, wherein the handover request comprises an indication for conditional handover (CHANG: FIG. 4 item 401 (“Transmit, from a source base station to a target base station, a handover preparation information RRC message including a handover condition”) wherein the handover request is the handover preparation information RRC message).
Claim 48:
CHANG teaches a first base station, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (CHANG: FIG. 1 wherein a base station would inherently require a memory and processor to perform the function). For further limitations, see rejection for claim 17 above.
Claim 52:
CHANG-ODE-YUN teaches the base station of claim 48. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 43 above.
Claim(s) 19-20 and 50-51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHANG in view of ODE and YUN, the combination hereby referred to as CHANG-ODE-YUN, and in further view of GENG et al. (US 20210058879 A1) (see 892 11/15/2023).
Claim 19:
CHANG-ODE-YUN teaches the method of claim 17, an Xn connection between the first base station and the second base station (CHANG: para 116 (“Xn is an interface between the source base station and the target base station”)), but does not explicitly disclose further comprising transmitting, by the first base station, an Xn interface setup message to the second base station, wherein the Xn interface setup message comprises a cell type of the first base station.
GENG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches further comprising transmitting, by the first base station, an Xn interface setup message to the second base station, wherein the Xn interface setup message comprises a cell type of the first base station (GENG: para 76 (“…both the first network device and the second network device are base stations. In a process of establishing an Xn connection between the base stations, cell information…of the base stations may be exchanged. For example, the cell information may be…a physical cell identifier (PCI)…”) wherein cell type/information is indicated by cell identifier in Xn interface setup message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHANG-ODE-YUN with GENG, hereby referred to as CHANG-ODE-YUN-GENG, for the benefit of supporting better synchronization between base station (GENG: para 87) and reducing power consumption (GENG: para 6).
Claim 20:
CHANG-ODE-YUN-GENG teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the cell type comprises a geostationary earth orbit type or a low earth orbit type (GENG: para 76 (“…both the first network device and the second network device are base stations. In a process of establishing an Xn connection between the base stations, cell information…of the base stations may be exchanged. For example, the cell information may be…a physical cell identifier (PCI)…”) wherein cell type/information is indicated by cell identifier in Xn interface setup message) and (YUN: para 52 (“The satellite may be classified as a low earth orbit…or a geostationary…orbit…”) and para 112 (“Satellite identification information…orbit information…”) wherein cell type/information includes either geostationary or low earth).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHANG-ODE with YUN and GENG for the benefit of benefit of reducing disruption in network communication (YUN: para 3), supporting better synchronization between base station (GENG: para 87), and reducing power consumption (GENG: para 6).
Claim 50:
CHANG-ODE-YUN teaches the base station of claim 48. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 19 above.
Claim 51:
CHANG-ODE-YUN-GENG teaches the base station of claim 50. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 20 above.
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 ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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.
/A.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416