DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to application number 17/632,564 filed on February 3rd ,2022. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on February 3rd, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statements (IDS), submitted on December 8th, 2023 and October 4th, 2023, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
In the remarks applicant contends that the “claimed invention explicitly requires a first value included in an RRC message being applied to a timer T310 which is a timer to detect a physical layer problem. Further, Applicant's claimed timer T310 is configured by changing timing of the processing circuitry based on whether the RRC message includes first information.
The examiner respectfully disagrees; under the broadest reasonable interpretation the examiner interprets the second limitation of claim one “wherein a first value is value included in the RRC message and applied to a timer T310” as the T310 timer value received by the receiver or the processing circuitry in the RRC Message applied to the T310 timer (T310 Timer Value Received = First value). This is substantiated by Da Silva et al. paragraph 0016 “The RLF parameters are configured in the IEs rlf-TimersAndConstants or radioResourceConfigDedicated IE. The rlf-TimersAndConstants IE can be transmitted in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NB in Narrowband Internet-of-Things (NB-IoT)). The radioResourceConfigDedicated IE can be within RRC messages such as RRCConnectionReconfguration. RRCConnectionReestablishment or RRCConnectionResume, and RRCConnectionSetup.”. Paragraph 009 and the subsequent table Section 5.3.10.7 discloses “ Radio Link Failure Timers and Constants reconfiguration; The UE shall: 1> if the received rfl-TimersAndConstant is set to release: 2> use values for timers T301, T310, T311 and constants N310, N311, as included in ue-TimersAndConstants received in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NBin NB-IoT); 1> else: 2> reconfigure the value of timers and constants in accordance with received rlf-TimersAndConstants;”).
In the remarks applicant contends that the “… claimed timer T310 is configured by changing timing of the processing circuitry based on whether the RRC message includes first information.
The examiner respectfully disagrees; In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (“claimed timer T310 is configured by changing timing of the processing circuitry based on whether the RRC message includes first information”) are not recited in the rejected claim. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Applicant appears to be limiting “the processing circuity changes timing” to a change implemented on the processing circuitry itself; however, the claim limitation does not reflect that scope. The claim does not define what the change is done upon, other than stating the processing circuitry changes timing. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, circuitry that reconfigures a timer T310 reads on the limitation because the reconfiguration changes timing of the timer T310.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.102(a) as being anticipated by DA Silva et al. (US 20200344019 A1).
Regarding claim 1, DA Silva et al. disclose a terminal apparatus for communicating with a base station apparatus, the terminal apparatus comprising: a receiver configured to receive a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message from the base station apparatus ; and processing circuitry configured to process the RRC message, wherein a first value is a value included in the RRC message and applied to a timer T310, the timer T310 being a timer to detect a physical layer problem, and the processing circuitry changes timing to configure the timer T310 by using the first value based on whether the RRC message includes first information (Paragraph 0016 discloses that the RLF parameters contained in RRC messages through “The RLF parameters are configured in the IEs rlf-TimersAndConstants or radioResourceConfigDedicated IE. The rlf-TimersAndConstants IE can be transmitted in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NB in Narrowband Internet-of-Things (NB-IoT)). The radioResourceConfigDedicated IE can be within RRC messages such as RRCConnectionReconfguration. RRCConnectionReestablishment or RRCConnectionResume, and RRCConnectionSetup.”. Paragraph 009 and the subsequent table Section 5.3.10.7 discloses “ Radio Link Failure Timers and Constants reconfiguration; The UE shall: 1> if the received rfl-TimersAndConstant is set to release: 2> use values for timers T301, T310, T311 and constants N310, N311, as included in ue-TimersAndConstants received in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NBin NB-IoT); 1> else: 2> reconfigure the value of timers and constants in accordance with received rlf-TimersAndConstants;”).
Regarding claim 4, DA Silva et al. disclose a method applied to a terminal apparatus for communicating with a base station apparatus, the method comprising: receiving a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message from the base station apparatus; and processing the RRC message, wherein a first value is a value included in the RRC message and applied to a first timer, and in the processing the RRC message, timing to apply the first value to the first timer is changed, based on whether the RRC message includes first information (The limitations of this claim are rejected on same grounds of rejection as that of claim #1).
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DA Silva et al. (US 20200344019 A1). in view of Yamada (US 20150173047 A1).
Regarding claim 2, DA Silva et al. disclose the terminal apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in a case that the RRC message includes the first information, the processing circuitry configures the timer T:310 (Paragraph 009 and the subsequent table Section 5.3.10.7 discloses “The UE shall: 1> if the received rfl-TimersAndConstant is set to release: 2> use values for timers T301, T310, T311 and constants N310, N311, as included in ue-TimersAndConstants received in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NBin NB-IoT); 1> else: 2> reconfigure the value of timers and constants in accordance with received rlf-TimersAndConstants;”).
DA Silva et al. fail to explicitly disclose using the first value after successful completion of a random-access procedure triggered for transmission of an RRC reconfiguration complete message in response to the RRC message.
However in an analogous art Yamada et al teaches using the first value after successful completion of a random-access procedure triggered for transmission of an RRC reconfiguration complete message in response to the RRC message (Paragraph 0054 discloses the RRC message includes the first information through “The UE RRC handover module 126 may receive an RRC connection reconfiguration message (also referred to as RRCConnectionReconfiguration) from a source MeNB 160.” Furthermore paragraph 0093 discloses applying the first value to the first timer after successful completion of a random-access procedure through “If the MAC of the MCG successfully completes the random access procedure, the UE 102 may stop the timer (e.g., timer T304) and the RRC connection reconfiguration procedure may end.” The teaching of stopping a timer, as taught by the primary, reads on the limitation "applies" because Applicant's specification discloses "applies" as being "(1) the stoppage of a timer (paragraph 729) that is defining the "processing T" executed after the MAC layer notifies successful completion of the random access procedure (see paragraph 745))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified DA Silva et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yamada et al. to use the first value after successful completion of a random-access procedure triggered for transmission of an RRC reconfiguration complete message in response to the RRC message., in order to use an optimal value for the T310 timer based upon the state of the UE.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DA Silva et al. (US 20200344019 A1). in view of Kim et al. (US 20210258844 A1).
Regarding claim 8, DA Silva et al. discloses the terminal apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in a case that the RRC message includes the first information, the processing circuitry configures the timer T310 by using the first value at a first timing (Paragraph 009 and the subsequent table Section 5.3.10.7 discloses “The UE shall: 1> if the received rfl-TimersAndConstant is set to release: 2> use values for timers T301, T310, T311 and constants N310, N311, as included in ue-TimersAndConstants received in SystemInformationBlockType2 (or SystemInformationBlockType2-NBin NB-IoT); 1> else: 2> reconfigure the value of timers and constants in accordance with received rlf-TimersAndConstants;”);
DA Silva et al. fails to explicitly disclose a case that the RRC message does not include the first information, the processing circuitry configures the timer T310 by using the first value at a second timing; wherein the first timing is different from the second timing.
However, in an analogous art Kim et al. teaches a case that the RRC message does not include the first information, the processing circuitry configures the timer T310 by using the first value at a second timing; wherein the first timing is different from the second timing. (Paragraph 0136-0138 disclose the sequence of events whereby the first value is applied to the first timer at second timing (before the random access procedure in contrast to after the random access procedure ) when the first information is not included (makeBeforeBreakSCG is not configured): 0136 -“start timer T307 with the timer value set to t307, as included in the mobilityControlInfoSCG, if makeBeforeBreakSCG is not configured.” 0137 –“start synchronising to the DL of the target PSCell;” 0138-“initiate the random access procedure on the PSCell, if rach-SkipSCG is not configured”.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified DA Silva to incorporate the teachings of Kim et al. the processing circuitry configures the timer T310 by using the first value at a second timing; wherein the first timing is different from the second timing., in order to ensure the successful execution of the configuration change.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Samuel Dilan Rutnam whose telephone number is 703-756-1374. The examiner can normally be reached between 8:30am-5:00pm Mon-Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy Kundu can be reached on 571-272-8586.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Samuel Dilan Rutnam/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights