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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 07/02/2026 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/30/2026 has been entered.
Remarks
The present Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 06/30/2026. Claims 1, 4, 5, 14, 17 and 18 are still pending in the present application (and claims 2, 3, 6-12, 15, 16 and 19-25 are withdrawn from further consideration).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 14, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LATHEEF et al. US 20210051550 A1 (hereinafter Latheef) in view of Yan et al. US 20210321313 A1 (hereinafter Yan) and further in view of KIM et al. -US 20220030485 A1- (hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Latheef discloses a method of conditional reconfiguration, performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising (FIG. 4, 5, 9A-10A for UE):
receiving a conditional reconfiguration comprising at least one candidate cell and at least one execution condition (FIG. 4 and 5, par. 0054, par. 0133, “On receiving the CHO target cell configurations from the TgNB 106, at step 405, the SgNB 106 associates the CHO triggering condition with the CHO target cell configurations and sends the CHO configuration of the TgNB 106 to the UE 102 in the RRC reconfiguration message. The CHO configuration of the TgNB 106 includes the CHO target cell configuration and the CHO triggering condition… At step 406, the UE 102 applies the received source cell configuration in the CHO configuration to continue on the source cell. The UE 102 performs the CHO execution, if the CHO triggering condition of the TgNB 106 have been satisfied.” Thus, UE receives the CHO triggering condition (i.e. claimed execution condition)); and
evaluating the at least one execution condition for the at least one candidate cell: if one of the at least one candidate cell satisfies a corresponding execution condition (FIG. 4 and 5, par. 0133 and 0138, “At step 406, the UE 102 applies the received source cell configuration in the CHO configuration to continue on the source cell. The UE 102 performs the CHO execution, if the CHO triggering condition of the TgNB 106 have been satisfied. The CHO execution involves applying the CHO target cell configuration of the TgNB 106 for the handover.”).
However, Latheef fails to explicitly disclose wherein the corresponding execution condition is one of the at least one execution condition, performing a handover to access the one of the at least one candidate cell; and transmitting a notification to network in response to a release condition corresponding to one of the at least one candidate cell is fulfilled.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan discloses wherein the corresponding execution condition is one of the at least one execution condition, performing a handover to access the one of the at least one candidate cell (FIG. 1, par. 0175-0177, “220. The terminal device determines a first target cell based on the configuration information… the first target cell is a candidate target cell that satisfies the trigger condition of the handover… after the terminal device determines the first target cell that satisfies the trigger condition, the method may further include: The terminal device performs a handover, that is, the terminal device is handed over from the serving cell to the first target cell”); and
transmitting a notification to network in response to a release condition corresponding to one of the at least one candidate cell is fulfilled (FIG. 6, par. 0336-0368, “650. The terminal device releases the conditional handover configuration information… when the terminal device determines that the cancellation condition is satisfied, the terminal device releases the conditional handover configuration information, that is, releases all or some of the information included in the configuration information… 660. The terminal device sends a notification message to the first network device.”; and par. 0364, “using an event A3 as an example, the conditional handover configuration information further includes the sixth signal quality threshold in addition to the first signal quality threshold (for example, the first signal quality threshold is represented by G) that is for triggering the handover and that is described in the embodiment in FIG. 3 or FIG. 4. The sixth signal quality threshold is a threshold that enables the terminal device to exit an execution process of determining whether a handover trigger condition is satisfied. For example, the sixth signal quality threshold is represented by S. If a difference between the signal quality of the candidate target cell and the signal quality of the serving cell is less than S, the terminal device releases content included in the conditional handover configuration information, exits the process of determining whether the handover trigger condition is satisfied, and continues to keep connecting to/transmitting data with the source cell.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate terminal device searching for a target cell that satisfies the trigger condition as taught by Yan to the performing the CHO execution when the CHO triggering condition is satisfied as disclosed by Latheef for purpose of determining whether the candidate target cell satisfies a trigger condition.
However, Latheef as modified by Yan fail to disclose wherein the release condition corresponding to the one of the at least one candidate cell comprises a successful access to another one of the at least one candidate cell in the conditional reconfiguration.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses wherein the release condition corresponding to the one of the at least one candidate cell comprises a successful access to another one of the at least one candidate cell in the conditional reconfiguration (par. 0096, “When the handover is successfully completed, the UE 1i-05 may stop timer T304 that is running, and discard the handover configuration information. When a handover success is reported by the target cell 1i-20, the source cell 1i-10 may discard context information of the UE 1i-05. Whether the handover is successful may also be determined by a UE context release message, which is an inter-node message transmitted from the target cell 1i-20 to the source cell 1i-10. In addition, the source cell 1i-10 may indicate other candidate target cells 1i-20 included in the handover configuration information, to discard the handover configuration information (or UE context information)”; par. 120-0121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the method and system as taught by Kim to the CHO configuration for storing candidate list as disclosed by Latheef as modified by Yan for purpose of discarding the handover configuration information to the other candidate target cells based on determined a successful handover to a target candidate cell.
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above, Latheef discloses wherein the conditional reconfiguration is configured for Conditional PSCell Addition (CPA), Conditional Handover (CHO) or Conditional PSCelt Change (CPC) (par. 0054).
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Latheef discloses wherein the release condition comprises a cell number of candidate cell (par. 0062, “The source cell 106 signals the new unique identifier to the one or more CHO candidate target cells 106”).
Regarding claim 14, a user equipment, comprising: a transceiver configured to receive and transmit a signal; and a processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to (FIG. 3):
receive a conditional reconfiguration comprising at least one candidate cell and at least one expectation condition (FIG. 4 and 5, par. 0054, par. 0133, “On receiving the CHO target cell configurations from the TgNB 106, at step 405, the SgNB 106 associates the CHO triggering condition with the CHO target cell configurations and sends the CHO configuration of the TgNB 106 to the UE 102 in the RRC reconfiguration message. The CHO configuration of the TgNB 106 includes the CHO target cell configuration and the CHO triggering condition… At step 406, the UE 102 applies the received source cell configuration in the CHO configuration to continue on the source cell. The UE 102 performs the CHO execution, if the CHO triggering condition of the TgNB 106 have been satisfied.” Thus, UE receives the CHO triggering condition (i.e. claimed execution condition)); and
evaluating the at least one execution condition for the at least one candidate cell: if one of the at least one candidate cell satisfies a corresponding execution condition (FIG. 4 and 5, par. 0133 and 0138, “At step 406, the UE 102 applies the received source cell configuration in the CHO configuration to continue on the source cell. The UE 102 performs the CHO execution, if the CHO triggering condition of the TgNB 106 have been satisfied. The CHO execution involves applying the CHO target cell configuration of the TgNB 106 for the handover.”).
However, Latheef fails to explicitly disclose wherein the corresponding execution condition is one of the at least one execution condition, performing a handover to access the one of the at least one candidate cell; and transmit a notification to network in response to a release condition corresponding to one of the at least one candidate cell is fulfilled.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan discloses wherein the corresponding execution condition is one of the at least one execution condition, performing a handover to access the one of the at least one candidate cell (FIG. 1, par. 0175-0177, “220. The terminal device determines a first target cell based on the configuration information… the first target cell is a candidate target cell that satisfies the trigger condition of the handover… after the terminal device determines the first target cell that satisfies the trigger condition, the method may further include: The terminal device performs a handover, that is, the terminal device is handed over from the serving cell to the first target cell”); and
transmit a notification to network in response to a release condition corresponding to one of the at least one candidate cell is fulfilled (FIG. 6, par. 0336-0368, “650. The terminal device releases the conditional handover configuration information… when the terminal device determines that the cancellation condition is satisfied, the terminal device releases the conditional handover configuration information, that is, releases all or some of the information included in the configuration information… 660. The terminal device sends a notification message to the first network device.”; and par. 0364, “using an event A3 as an example, the conditional handover configuration information further includes the sixth signal quality threshold in addition to the first signal quality threshold (for example, the first signal quality threshold is represented by G) that is for triggering the handover and that is described in the embodiment in FIG. 3 or FIG. 4. The sixth signal quality threshold is a threshold that enables the terminal device to exit an execution process of determining whether a handover trigger condition is satisfied. For example, the sixth signal quality threshold is represented by S. If a difference between the signal quality of the candidate target cell and the signal quality of the serving cell is less than S, the terminal device releases content included in the conditional handover configuration information, exits the process of determining whether the handover trigger condition is satisfied, and continues to keep connecting to/transmitting data with the source cell.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate terminal device searching for a target cell that satisfies the trigger condition as taught by Yan to the performing the CHO execution when the CHO triggering condition is satisfied as disclosed by Latheef for purpose of determining whether the candidate target cell satisfies a trigger condition.
However, Latheef as modified by Yan fail to disclose wherein the release condition corresponding to the one of the at least one candidate cell comprises a successful access to another one of the at least one candidate cell in the conditional reconfiguration.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses wherein the release condition corresponding to the one of the at least one candidate cell comprises a successful access to another one of the at least one candidate cell in the conditional reconfiguration (par. 0096, “When the handover is successfully completed, the UE 1i-05 may stop timer T304 that is running, and discard the handover configuration information. When a handover success is reported by the target cell 1i-20, the source cell 1i-10 may discard context information of the UE 1i-05. Whether the handover is successful may also be determined by a UE context release message, which is an inter-node message transmitted from the target cell 1i-20 to the source cell 1i-10. In addition, the source cell 1i-10 may indicate other candidate target cells 1i-20 included in the handover configuration information, to discard the handover configuration information (or UE context information)”; par. 120-0121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the method and system as taught by Kim to the CHO configuration for storing candidate list as disclosed by Latheef as modified by Yan for purpose of discarding the handover configuration information to the other candidate target cells based on determined a successful handover to a target candidate cell.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, as applied to claim 14 above, the claim is rejected for the same reason(s) as set forth claims 4 and 5 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 14 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 ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N whose telephone number is (571)270-1772. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5: 00 pm.
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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571)272-7915. 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.
/ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights