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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19-21, 24, 25, and 27 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA :
b. This is a fourth non final action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 04/21/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/25/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Independent claims 1, 9, 13, 21, 25, and 27 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant's arguments, see “There are two primary reasons why Yiu does not cure the deficiencies of Lenova and Keskitalo with regard to wherein the selected target cell has a highest number of beams whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold. The first reason is that Yiu's top-M by beam count above threshold teaches what to include in a measurement report, not how the UE selects a CHO target when multiple candidates satisfy the CHO condition. The Office Action never shows in Yiu, using the top-M by beam count above threshold being used as a selection rule at the CHO execution stage. The Office Action does not bridge the gap from "reporting cells with many good beams" to "UE must select for CHO the cell having the highest count of beams above threshold." The second reason, is that even if it were obvious to combine, Yiu's disclosure of "including a top M cells that have a highest number of beams measured above a defined threshold" would not solve the problem addressed in the detailed description and which the claimed subject matter solves.” on pages 3-4, filed on 04/21/2026, with respect to Yiu US Pub 2019/0230550, claiming provisional application 62658518 priority 2018-04-16 (hereinafter “Yiu”), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Zhang et al. US Pub 2017/0034730 (hereinafter “Zhang”), in combination with previously applied references Lenovo and Keskitalo. See section Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 below for complete details.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 9, 13, 21, 25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenovo NPL “Conditional handover in LTE system”, 3GPP, R2-1817546, Nov 12-16, 2018 (hereinafter “Lenovo”), in view of Keskitalo et al. US Pub 2014/0120921 (hereinafter “Keskitalo”), and further in view of Zhang et al. US Pub 2017/0034730 (hereinafter “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 1
Lenovo discloses a method performed by a User Equipment (UE) for initiating handover (see “Figure: Procedure for conditional handover”, on page 1, Section 2) of the UE (i.e. “UE” in Figure) from a source cell (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure) to a target cell (i.e. “Candidate eNB1”, “Candidate eNB2” in Figure), the method comprising:
obtaining information indicating the handover criterion (i.e. “Handover Command message” step 4 in Figure) from a first network node (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure), wherein the handover criterion is a conditional handover criterion (“For the conditional handover shown in the above figure, the handover condition, such as the neighbour cell becomes offset better than serving cell, is included in Handover Command message configured to UE. UE is allowed to autonomously decide when to perform handover after evaluating whether the configured condition is met.” On page 1, Section 2) for multiple candidate target cells (“Two candidates are just used as an example. As usual, the handover request from the source eNB can be transmitted to multiple candidate eNBs. In this procedure, UE reports measurement results based on the measurement configuration from the source eNB. Once eNB plans to perform conditional handover, conditional handover request may be transmitted by X2 interface to multiple candidates for robust handover purpose. Based on handover acknowledges from the candidate eNBs, one or more candidate cells may be included in conditional handover command configured to UE by Uu interface.”, on page 1, Section 2);
PNG
media_image1.png
390
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
determining that more than one candidate target cell fulfils the handover criterion (“Proposal 2: RRC reconfiguration for conditional handover is not applied immediately until condition is met. Since multiple candidates may be included in conditional handover command, it is possible that more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition. In this situation, UE should select one cell with the best channel quality.”, on page 1, Section 2);
selecting the target cell from multiple candidate target cells (“Proposal 3: UE selects the candidate cell with a best channel quality when more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition.”, on page 1, Section 2), wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills the handover criterion (“when more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition”, on page 1, Section 2),
initiating handover of the UE from the source cell to the selected target cell (i.e. “Access to target cell” step 5 in Figure).
Lenovo does not specifically teach monitoring the conditional handover criterion.
In an analogous art, Keskitalo discloses monitoring the conditional handover criterion (“At operation 130, the UE may examine data in the message (e.g., RRCConnectionReconfiguration message) received from the eNB1 including the preparatory handover command and may select a best candidate target cell for handover” [0074]; Fig. 6).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover to include Keskitalo’s method for minimizing the recovery time for connecting to a network, in order to facilitate handover scenario (Keskitalo [Abstract]).
Lenovo and Keskitalo do not specifically teach wherein the selected target cell has a highest number of beams whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold.
In an analogous art, Zhang discloses wherein the selected target cell (“Up detecting control beams, UE 303 may determine whether the detected control beam is a candidate control beam based on a candidate rule. In one embodiment, the detected control beam is a candidate control beam if the signal measurement is larger than a threshold” [0033]) has a highest number of beams (“However, using method #1, cell #0 may rank higher than cell #2 with a higher number of candidate control beams. “ [0036]) whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold (“For example, a signal threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected if the maximum signal measurement is greater than the signal threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected. Similarly, a number threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected if the number of qualified control beams is greater than the number threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected. In other embodiments, a set of thresholds and/or a combination of thresholds are used for cell ranking.” [0036]). In other words, Zhang discloses that the target cell selected by the UE is the cell having the most beams satisfying a predetermined threshold.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo, to include Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold, in order to facilitate cell selection for handover. It could have been easily conceived by a person skilled in the art to take into consideration the number of beams when selecting a handover destination from among a plurality of candidate cells on the basis of the technical matters described by Zhang above. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 9
Lenovo discloses a method performed by a first network node (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure) for initiating handover (step 2 “conditional handover request” in Figure) of a User Equipment (UE) (i.e. “UE” in Figure) from a source cell (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure) to a target cell (i.e. “Candidate eNB1”, “Candidate eNB2” in Figure), the method comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
390
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion (“when more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition”, on page 1, Section 2), wherein the handover criterion is a conditional handover criterion for multiple candidate target cells (“Proposal 2: RRC reconfiguration for conditional handover is not applied immediately until condition is met. Since multiple candidates may be included in conditional handover command, it is possible that more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition. In this situation, UE should select one cell with the best channel quality.”, on page 1, Section 2),
providing information (i.e. “Handover Command message” step 4 in Figure) indicating the handover criterion to the UE (“For the conditional handover shown in the above figure, the handover condition, such as the neighbour cell becomes offset better than serving cell, is included in Handover Command message configured to UE. UE is allowed to autonomously decide when to perform handover after evaluating whether the configured condition is met.” On page 1, Section 2).
Lenovo does not specifically teach providing, to the UE, information indicating at least one parameter on which the UE should base its selection of the target cell from multiple candidate target cells, wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion; wherein the at least one parameter comprises one triggering quantity out of multiple triggering quantities.
In an analogous art, Keskitalo discloses providing, to the UE (“As shown in FIG. 2, the eNBs 52 and 53 may each include a preparatory handover command manager 82 configured to execute functions associated with each corresponding eNB with respect to receiving information from and/or providing information to the UE 50, the EPC 58 and/or other eNBs related to, for example, communication format parameters and/or measurement parameters for handover, measurement reports, as well as generation of one or expanded handover commands (e.g., preparatory handover commands)” [0045]), information (i.e. “preparatory handover command”) indicating at least one parameter (e.g. “received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.”) on which the UE should base its selection of the target cell from multiple candidate target cells, wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion (“the user terminal may select one of the candidate cells, identified in a message including the preparatory handover command, as a target cell for handover. In response to selecting the target cell, the user terminal may be handed over to the target cell and may send a handover complete message to the target cell indicating that the handover is complete. The selection of the target cell by the user terminal may be based on one or more measurement results available at the time of a detected network connection failure or deterioration in radio quality or conditions based on measurements (e.g., received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.) of candidate cells identified in the message including the preparatory handover command.” [0012] and furthermore “In an example embodiment, the apparatus 68 may identify one or more network connection failures or deteriorations in radio quality in instances in which the preparatory handover command module 80 may detect: (1) that the apparatus 68 loses a connection with a source/serving cell (e.g., originating target eNB 52) before a configured event (e.g., generation of one or more measurement reports) triggers; (2) that the apparatus 68 is unable to send a measurement report(s) to a network (e.g., EPC 58, originating eNB 52, etc.) due to a lost connection; (3) that an eNB (e.g., originating eNB 52) is unable to receive or decode a measurement report(s) generated by the preparatory handover command module 80; (3) that a handover command is not successfully received by the apparatus 68; or (4) that the apparatus 68 is unable to establish a connection to a target cell (e.g., target eNB 53) as well as any other suitable conditions/instances that may affect a connection with a network such as, for example, deteriorations in radio quality, etc. For example, the preparatory handover command module 80 may detect one or more network connection failures or deteriorations in radio quality in instances in which: (1) a connection may be lost due to poor network coverage in certain areas of the network (e.g., certain areas of a cell); (2) an interference caused by same layer cells (e.g., intra frequency) causing connection problems; and (3) instances in which connection problems may not be restored in a layer 1 (L1) connection within a predetermined time period, resulting in radio link failure (RLF), and any other suitable instances that may affect network connections and/or radio quality conditions.” [0064]),
providing information indicating the handover criterion to the UE (“As shown in FIG. 2, the eNBs 52 and 53 may each include a preparatory handover command manager 82 configured to execute functions associated with each corresponding eNB with respect to receiving information from and/or providing information to the UE 50, the EPC 58 and/or other eNBs related to, for example, communication format parameters and/or measurement parameters for handover, measurement reports, as well as generation of one or expanded handover commands (e.g., preparatory handover commands)” [0045]).
wherein the at least one parameter comprises one triggering quantity out of multiple triggering quantities (“The preparatory handover command may also include data indicating that the candidate target cells are selectable for handover in response to a future detection of one or more handover conditions.” [0017] and furthermore “(“The data in the measurement reports indicating the one or more best cells may be based in part on one or more corresponding RSRP levels/values RSRQ levels/values, and any other suitable data (e.g., measurements).” [0072]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover to include Keskitalo’s method for minimizing the recovery time for connecting to a network, in order to facilitate handover scenario (Keskitalo [Abstract]).
Lenovo and Keskitalo do not specifically teach wherein the selected target cell has a highest number of beams whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold.
In an analogous art, Zhang discloses wherein the selected target cell (“Up detecting control beams, UE 303 may determine whether the detected control beam is a candidate control beam based on a candidate rule. In one embodiment, the detected control beam is a candidate control beam if the signal measurement is larger than a threshold” [0033]) has a highest number of beams (“However, using method #1, cell #0 may rank higher than cell #2 with a higher number of candidate control beams. “ [0036]) whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold (“For example, a signal threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected if the maximum signal measurement is greater than the signal threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected. Similarly, a number threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected if the number of qualified control beams is greater than the number threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected. In other embodiments, a set of thresholds and/or a combination of thresholds are used for cell ranking.” [0036]). In other words, Zhang discloses that the target cell selected by the UE is the cell having the most beams satisfying a predetermined threshold.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo, to include Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold, in order to facilitate cell selection for handover. It could have been easily conceived by a person skilled in the art to take into consideration the number of beams when selecting a handover destination from among a plurality of candidate cells on the basis of the technical matters described by Zhang above. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 13
A User Equipment (UE) for initiating handover of the UE from a source cell to a target cell, the UE being adapted to:
obtain information indicating the handover criterion from a first network node, wherein the handover criterion is a conditional handover criterion for multiple candidate target cells;
monitor the conditional handover criterion;
determine that more than one candidate target cell fulfils the handover criterion;
select the target cell from multiple candidate target cells, wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills the handover criterion; and to
initiate handover of the UE from the source cell to the selected target cell, wherein the selected target cell has a highest number of beams whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 13 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 13 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 21
Lenovo discloses a first network node (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure) for initiating handover (step 2 “conditional handover request” in Figure) of a User Equipment (UE) (i.e. “UE” in Figure) from a source cell (i.e. “source eNB” in Figure) to a target cell (i.e. “Candidate eNB1”, “Candidate eNB2” in Figure), the first network node being adapted to:
PNG
media_image1.png
390
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
provide information (i.e. “Handover Command message” step 4 in Figure) indicating the handover criterion to the UE (“For the conditional handover shown in the above figure, the handover condition, such as the neighbour cell becomes offset better than serving cell, is included in Handover Command message configured to UE. UE is allowed to autonomously decide when to perform handover after evaluating whether the configured condition is met.” On page 1, Section 2); and
wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion (“when more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition”, on page 1, Section 2), wherein the handover criterion is a conditional handover criterion for multiple candidate target cells (“Proposal 2: RRC reconfiguration for conditional handover is not applied immediately until condition is met. Since multiple candidates may be included in conditional handover command, it is possible that more than one candidate cell meets the handover condition. In this situation, UE should select one cell with the best channel quality.”, on page 1, Section 2).
Lenovo does not specifically teach provide, to the UE, information indicating the at least one parameter on which the UE should base its selection of the target cell from multiple candidate target cells, wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion; wherein the at least one parameter comprises one triggering quantity out of multiple triggering quantities.
In an analogous art, Keskitalo discloses provide, to the UE (“As shown in FIG. 2, the eNBs 52 and 53 may each include a preparatory handover command manager 82 configured to execute functions associated with each corresponding eNB with respect to receiving information from and/or providing information to the UE 50, the EPC 58 and/or other eNBs related to, for example, communication format parameters and/or measurement parameters for handover, measurement reports, as well as generation of one or expanded handover commands (e.g., preparatory handover commands)” [0045]), information (i.e. “preparatory handover command”) indicating the at least one parameter (e.g. “received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.”) on which the UE should base its selection of the target cell from multiple candidate target cells, wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells fulfills a handover criterion (“the user terminal may select one of the candidate cells, identified in a message including the preparatory handover command, as a target cell for handover. In response to selecting the target cell, the user terminal may be handed over to the target cell and may send a handover complete message to the target cell indicating that the handover is complete. The selection of the target cell by the user terminal may be based on one or more measurement results available at the time of a detected network connection failure or deterioration in radio quality or conditions based on measurements (e.g., received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.) of candidate cells identified in the message including the preparatory handover command.” [0012] and furthermore “In an example embodiment, the apparatus 68 may identify one or more network connection failures or deteriorations in radio quality in instances in which the preparatory handover command module 80 may detect: (1) that the apparatus 68 loses a connection with a source/serving cell (e.g., originating target eNB 52) before a configured event (e.g., generation of one or more measurement reports) triggers; (2) that the apparatus 68 is unable to send a measurement report(s) to a network (e.g., EPC 58, originating eNB 52, etc.) due to a lost connection; (3) that an eNB (e.g., originating eNB 52) is unable to receive or decode a measurement report(s) generated by the preparatory handover command module 80; (3) that a handover command is not successfully received by the apparatus 68; or (4) that the apparatus 68 is unable to establish a connection to a target cell (e.g., target eNB 53) as well as any other suitable conditions/instances that may affect a connection with a network such as, for example, deteriorations in radio quality, etc. For example, the preparatory handover command module 80 may detect one or more network connection failures or deteriorations in radio quality in instances in which: (1) a connection may be lost due to poor network coverage in certain areas of the network (e.g., certain areas of a cell); (2) an interference caused by same layer cells (e.g., intra frequency) causing connection problems; and (3) instances in which connection problems may not be restored in a layer 1 (L1) connection within a predetermined time period, resulting in radio link failure (RLF), and any other suitable instances that may affect network connections and/or radio quality conditions.” [0064]),
provide information indicating the handover criterion to the UE (“As shown in FIG. 2, the eNBs 52 and 53 may each include a preparatory handover command manager 82 configured to execute functions associated with each corresponding eNB with respect to receiving information from and/or providing information to the UE 50, the EPC 58 and/or other eNBs related to, for example, communication format parameters and/or measurement parameters for handover, measurement reports, as well as generation of one or expanded handover commands (e.g., preparatory handover commands)” [0045]), wherein the at least one parameter comprises one triggering quantity out of multiple triggering quantities (“The preparatory handover command may also include data indicating that the candidate target cells are selectable for handover in response to a future detection of one or more handover conditions.” [0017] and furthermore “(“The data in the measurement reports indicating the one or more best cells may be based in part on one or more corresponding RSRP levels/values RSRQ levels/values, and any other suitable data (e.g., measurements).” [0072]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover to include Keskitalo’s method for minimizing the recovery time for connecting to a network, in order to facilitate handover scenario (Keskitalo [Abstract]).
Lenovo and Keskitalo do not specifically teach wherein the selected target cell has a highest number of beams whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold.
In an analogous art, Zhang discloses wherein the selected target cell (“Up detecting control beams, UE 303 may determine whether the detected control beam is a candidate control beam based on a candidate rule. In one embodiment, the detected control beam is a candidate control beam if the signal measurement is larger than a threshold” [0033]) has a highest number of beams (“However, using method #1, cell #0 may rank higher than cell #2 with a higher number of candidate control beams. “ [0036]) whose measurement quantity is above a predetermined or configurable threshold (“For example, a signal threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected if the maximum signal measurement is greater than the signal threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected. Similarly, a number threshold is set such that the best-ranked cell using method #1 is selected if the number of qualified control beams is greater than the number threshold; otherwise, the best-ranked cell using method #2 is selected. In other embodiments, a set of thresholds and/or a combination of thresholds are used for cell ranking.” [0036]). In other words, Zhang discloses that the target cell selected by the UE is the cell having the most beams satisfying a predetermined threshold.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo, to include Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold, in order to facilitate cell selection for handover. It could have been easily conceived by a person skilled in the art to take into consideration the number of beams when selecting a handover destination from among a plurality of candidate cells on the basis of the technical matters described by Zhang above. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Zhang’s method for selecting target cells based on highest number of beams with predetermined threshold into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 25
A computer program stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 1.
The scope and subject matter of non-transitory computer readable medium claim 25 is drawn to the computer program product of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore computer program product claim 25 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 27
Lenovo, as modified by Keskitalo and Zhang, previously discloses the method according to claim 5,
Keskitalo further discloses wherein the at least one parameter indicates that the target cell is to be selected based on a strongest Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) value and a strongest Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) value (“The data in the measurement reports indicating the one or more best cells may be based in part on one or more corresponding RSRP levels/values RSRQ levels/values, and any other suitable data (e.g., measurements).” [0072]).
Claims 4, 5, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenovo, in view of Keskitalo and Zhang, and further in view of Wu et al. US Pub 2020/0336957 (hereinafter “Wu”).
Regarding claim 4
Lenovo, as modified by Keskitalo and Zhang, previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Keskitalo further discloses wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells has one or more associated parameter instance(s) of each of at least one parameter, and wherein the UE selects the target cell based values of the respective parameter(s) instances (i.e. RSRP/RSRQ) associated with the respective candidate target cell (“The selection of the target cell by the user terminal may be based on one or more measurement results available at the time of a detected network connection failure or deterioration in radio quality or conditions based on measurements (e.g., received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.) of candidate cells identified in the message including the preparatory handover command.” [0012]).
Lenovo, Keskitalo, and Zhang disclose wherein the UE selects the target cell based on values of the respective parameter(s) instances associated with the respective candidate target cell but do not specifically teach comparing values of the respective parameter(s) instances associated with the respective candidate target cell.
In an analogous art, Wu discloses wherein the UE selects the target cell based on comparing values of the respective parameter(s) instances associated with the respective candidate target cell (“The configuration to be used in the target cell may either be specified independently (e.g., an establishment) or as a delta compared to the configuration used in the source cell (e.g., a reconfiguration).” [0063]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo and Zhang, to include Wu’s method for conditional handovers involving multiple candidate cells, in order to facilitate conditional handover scenario (Wu [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Wu’s method for conditional handovers involving multiple candidate cells into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 5
Lenovo, as modified by Keskitalo, Zhang, and Wu, previously discloses the method according to claim 4,
Keskitalo further discloses wherein the UE selects the target cell out of the multiple candidate target cells based on the target cell having a predetermined value (i.e. levels/values) of the associated parameter instance (e.g. RSRO/RSRQ) of the at least one parameter (“The selection of the target cell by the user terminal may be based on one or more measurement results available at the time of a detected network connection failure or deterioration in radio quality or conditions based on measurements (e.g., received symbol reference power (RSRP) levels/values, received symbol reference quality (RSRQ) levels/values, etc.) of candidate cells identified in the message including the preparatory handover command.” [0012]).
Regarding claim 16
The UE according to claim 13,
wherein each candidate target cell of the multiple candidate target cells has one or more associated parameter instance(s), and
wherein the UE selects the target cell based on comparing values of the respective parameter(s) instances associated with the respective candidate target cell.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 16 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 4. Therefore apparatus claim 16 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 17
The UE according to claim 16, wherein the UE is adapted to select the target cell out of the multiple candidate target cells based on the target cell having a predetermined value of the associated parameter instance of at least one parameter.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 17 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 5. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenovo, in view of Keskitalo and Zhang, and further in view of Yamada et al. US Pub 2020/0336957 (hereinafter “Yamada”) and of Nokia NPL “Further details of Conditional Handover in E-UTRAN” , 3GPP, R2-1900614, available for internet download on 2019-02-13 (hereinafter “Nokia”).
Regarding claim 7 (Currently Amended)
Lenovo, as modified by Keskitalo and Zhang, previously discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the target cell is selected based on at least one of:
Keskitalo further discloses
Highest delta of at least one of:
a strongest Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) value (“The measurement reports may include data specifying RSRP levels/values, RSRQ levels/values or any other suitable data of a source/serving cell (e.g., originating eNB 52) as well as one or more neighboring cells (e.g., target eNB 53)” [0061]); and/or
a strongest Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) value (“The measurement reports may include data specifying RSRP levels/values, RSRQ levels/values or any other suitable data of a source/serving cell (e.g., originating eNB 52) as well as one or more neighboring cells (e.g., target eNB 53)” [0061]); and/or
a highest priority (“For instance, the preparatory handover command manager 82 of the source/serving cell may assign a candidate cell with a high RSRP level/value to have a higher priority than another candidate cell with a lower RSRP level/value. The priorities of the candidate target cells may be based on aspects other than the radio related parameters.” [0048]); and/or
allocated Random Access Channel (RACH) resources which are first occurring in time (“The message sent from the candidate cells to the source/serving cell acknowledging receipt of the handover request may include one or more parameters including, but not limited to, RadioResourceConfigCommon parameters, RACH-ConfigDedicated parameters or any other suitable parameters” [0050]); and/or
an intra-frequency (“For example, the preparatory handover command module 80 may detect one or more network connection failures or deteriorations in radio quality in instances in which: (1) a connection may be lost due to poor network coverage in certain areas of the network (e.g., certain areas of a cell); (2) an interference caused by same layer cells (e.g., intra frequency) causing connection problems” [0064]); and/or
Lenovo and Keskitalo do not specifically teach b) Cell selection/cell reselection criteria; and/or e) Timing.
In an analogous art, Yamada discloses
Cell selection/cell reselection criteria (“In RRC_CONNECTED, the UE may determine the target cell based on the result of the cell reselection” [0079]); and/or
Timing (“The condition may be related to a handover, triggering a handover, a timing that the UE starts a timer related to a handover failure (e.g., T304), a timing that the UE starts synchronizing to the downlink of the target cell, and/or a timing that the UE resets one or more MAC entities.” [0067]);
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo and Zhang, to include Yamada’s method for performing a cell reselection procedure in response to receive the one or more RRC parameters, in order to facilitate handover scenario (Yamada [0067]).
Lenovo, Keskitalo, Zhang, and Yamada do not specifically teach The greatest margin to a Conditional Handover, CHO, execution trigger condition; and/or A combination of an improvement speed (i.e. mobility) and a margin to the CHO execution trigger condition.
In an analogous art, Nokia discloses
The greatest margin to a Conditional Handover (CHO) execution trigger condition (“Proposal 2: In the rare case the CHO condition expires for multiple target cells at the same time, it should be left up to the UE implementation which of the corresponding target cells it selects for CHO execution.” On page 1, Section 2.2.); and/or
A combination of an improvement speed (i.e. mobility) and a margin to the CHO execution trigger condition (“In today’s legacy handover procedure, T310 is stopped when the UE receives RRC reconfiguration with mobility information (“Handover Command”). This is a reasonable behaviour since the UE would immediately detach from the source cell. However, for CHO, the UE stays in the source cell and detaches later. Therefore, a pure stop of T310 would not be a reasonable behaviour.” On page 1, Section 2.3).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo, Zhang, and Yamada, to include Nokia’s method for conditional handover in E-UTRAN, in order to facilitate conditional handover scenario (Nokia [Section 3 Conclusions]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Nokia’s method for conditional handover in E-UTRAN into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 19 (Currently Amended)
The method according to claim 17, wherein the at least one parameter indicates that the target cell is to be selected based on at least one of:
One or multiple triggering quantities; and/or
Cell selection/cell reselection criteria; and/or
UE implementation; and/or
Highest delta of at least one of:
a strongest Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) value; and/or
a strongest Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) value; and/or
a strongest Signal to Interference & Noise Ratio (SINR) value; and/or
a highest priority; and/or
allocated Random Access Channel (RACH) resources which are first occurring in time; and/or
a cell in which the UE performed latest measurement; and/or
an intra-frequency; and/or
an inter-frequency; and/or
fulfilled a condition based on a combination of any of i-viii
Timing; and/or
The cell with highest trigger quantity; and/or
The cell with highest selection quantity, where that is configurable; and/or
The cell with highest selection quantity, where that is based on a pre-defined rule; and/or
The greatest margin to a Conditional Handover (CHO) execution trigger condition; and/or
A combination of an improvement speed and a margin to the CHO execution trigger condition; and/or
A combination of the improvement speed and the value of the trigger quantity; and/or
A combination of priority and at least one of cell selection and cell reselection criteria; and/or
A strongest RSRP value; and/or
A strongest RSRQ value; and/or
A strongest SINR value; and/or
A highest priority; and/or
Allocated RACH resources which are first occurring in time; and/or
A cell in which the UE performed latest measurement; and/or
An intra-frequency; and/or
An inter-frequency; and/or
A combination of frequency priorities and margin to the CHO trigger condition; and/or
A combination of frequency priorities and the value of the trigger quantity; and/or
combination of any of the parameters listed above.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 19 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 7. Therefore apparatus claim 19 corresponds to method claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenovo, in view of Keskitalo, Zhang, Yamada, and Nokia, and further in view of Agiwal et al. US Pub 2018/0317264 (hereinafter “Agiwal”).
Regarding claim 8
Lenovo, as modified by Keskitalo, Zhang, Yamada, and Nokia previously discloses the method according to claim 7,
Lenovo further discloses wherein the information indicating the at least one parameter is comprised in an RRCReconfiguration message (“When UE receives RRC reconfiguration message including conditional handover command”, on page 1, Section 2).
Keskitalo further discloses wherein the information indicating the at least one parameter is comprised in an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message (“RRCConnectionReconfiguration” [0013]), or in a mobilityControlInfo information element (“mobilityControlInfo” [0013]).
Lenovo, Keskitalo, Zhang, Yamada, and Nokia do not specifically teach wherein the information indicating the at least one parameter is comprised in a ReconfigurationWithSync information element.
In an analogous art, Agiwal discloses wherein the information indicating the at least one parameter is comprised in a ReconfigurationWithSync information element (“In an embodiment, if handover (or random access triggered by reception of reconfiguration message including reconfigurationwithSync IE) is a high priority random access event” [0150]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lenovo’s method of conditional handover, as modified by Keskitalo, Zhang, Yamada, and Nokia, to include Agiwal’s method for performing a random access procedure in a wireless communication system, in order to facilitate handover scenario (Agiwal [0122]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Agiwal’s method for performing a random access procedure in a wireless communication system into Lenovo’s method of conditional handover since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 12, 20, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenovo, in view of Keskitalo and Zhang, and further in view of Agiwal et al. US Pub 2018/0317264 (hereinafter “Agiwal”).
Regarding claim 12
The method according to claim 9, wherein the information indicating the at least one parameter is comprised in an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message, or in a mobilityControlInfo information element, or an RRCReconfiguration message, or in a ReconfigurationWithSync information element.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 12 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in claim 8. Therefore method claim 12 corresponds to method claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Regarding claim 20
The UE according to claim 17, wherein the information indicating the parameter comprised in an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message, or a mobilityControlinfo information element, or an RRCReconfiguration message, or in a ReconfigurationWithSync information element.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 20 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 8. Therefore apparatus claim 20 corresponds to method claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Regarding claim 24
The first network node according to claim 21, wherein the information indicating the parameter comprised in an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message, or in a mobilityControlInfo information element, or an RRCReconfiguration message, or in a ReconfigurationWithSync information element.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 24 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 20. Therefore apparatus claim 24 corresponds to method claim 20 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 20 rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights