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 statements submitted on 08/28/2025 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Remarks
The present Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 12/12/2025. Claims 1, 4, 5, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 26 are still pending in the present application (and claims 2, 3, 6-12, 15, 16 and 19-25 are withdrawn from further consideration). This Action is made FINAL.
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, 13, 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).
Regarding claim 1, Latheef disclose 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.
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 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Latheef 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. 0062, “The source cell 106 signals the new unique identifier to the one or more CHO candidate target cells 106. The one or more CHO candidate target cells 106 may add a value in the CHO target cell configurations, which indicate the new unique identifier. The one or more CHO candidate target cells 106 may also add the value indicating the new unique identifier as a part of the RRC reconfiguration message inside the container.”).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 13 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Latheef in view of Yan as applied to claim(s) 1 and 14 above, and further in view of PARK et al. -US 20220030476 A1- (hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Latheef as modified by Yan disclose the claimed invention except 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, Park 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. 0121-0122, “The first terminal 801 may add one or more cells other than the first cell 802 as candidate PCell(s)…” AND par. 0130, “The first terminal 801 may perform an operation of releasing one or more candidate PCells (S895). The first terminal 801 may perform a candidate PCell release operation by receiving a third configuration message instructing to release some or all of one or more candidate PCells from the second cell 803-1 after the PCell swap operation. Alternatively, the first terminal 501 may autonomously determine and perform release of some or all of one or more candidate PCells after the PCell swap operation.”).
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 Park to the CHO configuration for storing candidate list as disclosed by Latheef as modified by Yan for purpose of determining and performing release of some or all of one or more candidate PCells after the PCell swap operation.
Regarding claim 26, as applied to claim 14 above, the claim is rejected for the same reason(s) as set forth claim 13 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.
On page 12 of the Applicant’s remarks, Applicant argues, “Latheef does not disclose that the UE independently evaluates whether an execution condition is satisfied and autonomously performs a handover based on such evaluation.” Examiner respectfully disagrees since Latheef in paragraph [0133] and [0138] discloses, “The UE 102 performs the CHO execution, if the CHO triggering condition of the TgNB 106 have been satisfied”, which is based on the UE execute CHO based on satisfying the CHO triggering condition. However, for purpose of clarity, Examiner applies the teachings of Yan to disclose the limitation clearly (see rejection 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 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