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 .
Response to Amendment
The following is a non-final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 08/12/2025 for response of the office action mailed on 06/24/2025. Claims 1-2, 20-21, 23, 26 and 31 have been amended. Claims 5-6, 8-9, 11, 14-19 are cancelled. Claims 1-4, 7, 10, 12-13, and 20-31 are pending in this application.
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.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 1-2, 12-13, 20-21, 23-26 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fujishiro et al . (US 20220386404 A1), Fujishiro hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1, Fujishiro teaches a method performed by an integrated access and back-haul (IAB) node, the method comprising: initiating, by the IAB node, a re-establishment procedure if the IAB node detects a failure of both a master cell group (MCG) link between the IAB node and a master node (MN) and a secondary cell group (SCG) link between the IAB node and a secondary node (SN); (Fig. 7 & ¶0061 - ¶0066. Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link);
and transmitting a radio link failure (RLF) notification to a child node if both the MCG link and the SCG link fail (Fig. 7 & ¶0067- ¶0068 - The BAP layer of the IAB node 300 transmits a notification message related to the BH RLF, to the BAP layer of the lower IAB node 300. The failure notification message is a message from the BAP layer. Such a failure notification message is hereinafter referred to as the “BH RLF notification”. ¶0120 - In step S402, in response to detection of the BH RLF in step S401, the BAP layer of the IAB node 300-1 transmits the type 1/2 BH RLF notification (or type 1/2/3 BH RLF notification) to the IAB node 300-2. ¶0224 - Type 4x—“Indicating child nodes to perform RLF procedure”: This is implemented in a case where the parent transmits this indication, and in a case of receiving the indication, the child node should execute an RLF related procedure).
Re. Claims 2 and 21, Fujishiro teaches Claims 1 and 20.
Fujishiro further teaches the failure comprises an RLF/RLF of both the MCG link and the SCG link (Fig. 7 & ¶0066 - Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link).
Re. Claims 12 and 24, Fujishiro teaches Claims 1 and 20.
Fujishiro further teaches transmitting the RLF notification to the child node if a timer expires and failure of the SCG link is detected/the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to transmit the RLF notification to the child node if a timer expires and failure of the SCG link is detected (Fig. 7 & ¶0066 - The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link. ¶0119 - As illustrated in FIG. 11, in step S401, the MT of the IAB node 300-1 detects a BH RLF with the donor gNB 200-1 corresponding to the upper node of the IAB node 300-1 … ¶0137 - In step S412, the MT of the IAB node 300-2 detects expiration of the Timer B. ¶0138 - Alternatively, in step S413, the BAP layer of the IAB node 300-2 receives the type 4 BH RLF notification from the IAB node 300-1).
Re. Claims 13 and 25, Fujishiro teaches Claims 1 and 20.
Fujishiro further teaches performing the re-establishment procedure after the re-establishment procedure is initiated;/ the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: perform the re-establishment procedure after the re-establishment procedure is initiated; (¶0064 - Secondly, in a case where the timer T310 expires without stopping the timer T310, the MT detects an RLF and starts a timer T311 (in other words, initiates RRC re-establishment processing), and executes cell selection processing to recover the BH link) and if the re-establishment procedure fails, entering into an idle mode or an inactive mode and transmitting the RLF notification to the child node/and enter into an idle mode or an inactive mode and transmit the RLF notification to the child node based at least in part on the re-establishment procedure fails (¶0065 - Thirdly, in a case where the timer T311 expires without success in recovery of the BH link, the MT transitions to an RRC idle state. A failure in recovery from the BH RLF (in other words, expiration of the timer T311) following the detection of the BH RLF is hereinafter referred to as a failure in BH link recovery. ¶0067 - The BAP layer of the IAB node 300 transmits a notification message related to the BH RLF, to the BAP layer of the lower IAB node 300. The failure notification message is a message from the BAP layer. Such a failure notification message is hereinafter referred to as the “BH RLF notification”).
Re. Claim 20, Fujishiro teaches an integrated access and back-haul (IAB) node, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the IAB node to: (Fig. 3);
initiate, by the IAB node, a re-establishment procedure if the IAB node detects a failure of both a master cell group (MCG) link between the IAB node and a master node (MN) and a secondary cell group (SCG) link between the IAB node and a secondary node (SN); (Fig. 7 & ¶0061-¶0066 - Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link. ¶0068 - For example, when receiving a BH RLF notification from the BAP layer of the upper IAB node 300 … the MT initiates processing for recovering the BH link, for example, RRC re-establishment processing);
and transmit a radio link failure (RLF) notification to a child node if both the MCG link and the SCG link fail (Fig. 7, 11 & ¶0120 - In step S402, in response to detection of the BH RLF in step S401, the BAP layer of the IAB node 300-1 transmits the type 1/2 BH RLF notification (or type 1/2/3 BH RLF notification) to the IAB node 300-2. ¶0224 - Type 4x—“Indicating child nodes to perform RLF procedure”: This is implemented in a case where the parent transmits this indication, and in a case of receiving the indication, the child node should execute an RLF related procedure).
Re. Claim 23, Fujishiro teaches Claim 20.
Fujishiro further teaches the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to transmit the RLF notification to the child node if both of the MCG link and the SCG link fail (Fig. 1, 3, 11 & ¶0066 - Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link. ¶0067 - The BAP layer of the IAB node 300 transmits a notification message related to the BH RLF, to the BAP layer of the lower IAB node 300. The failure notification message is a message from the BAP layer. Such a failure notification message is hereinafter referred to as the “BH RLF notification”);
Re. Claim 26, Fujishiro teaches a child node for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the child node to: (Fig. 3);
receive a radio link failure (RLF) notification from an integrated access and back-haul (IAB) node based on detection of a failure of both a master cell group (MCG) link between the IAB node and a master node (MN) and a secondary cell group (SCG) link between the IAB node and a secondary node (SN) (Fig. 1, 11 & ¶0120 - In step S402, in response to detection of the BH RLF in step S401, the BAP layer of the IAB node 300-1 transmits the type 1/2 BH RLF notification (or type 1/2/3 BH RLF notification) to the IAB node 300-2. ¶0224 - Type 4x—“Indicating child nodes to perform RLF procedure”: This is implemented in a case where the parent transmits this indication, and in a case of receiving the indication, the child node should execute an RLF related procedure).
Re. Claim 30, Fujishiro teaches Claim 26.
Fujishiro further teaches the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to perform at least one of re-establishment or stopping data transmission based at least in part on receiving the RLF notification (Fig. 1, 7, 11 & ¶0068 - For example, when receiving a BH RLF notification from the BAP layer of the upper IAB node 300, the BAP layer of the lower IAB node 300 notifies the reception to the MT of the lower IAB node 300, and the MT initiates processing for recovering the BH link, for example, RRC re-establishment processing).
Re. Claim 31, Fujishiro teaches a method performed by a child node, the method comprising: receiving a radio link failure (RLF) notification from an integrated access and back- haul (IAB) node based on detection of a failure of both a master cell group (MCG) link between the IAB node and a master node (MN) and a secondary cell group (SCG) link between the IAB node and a secondary node (SN) are not available (Fig. 1, 3, 7, 11 & ¶0066 - Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link. ¶0068 - For example, when receiving a BH RLF notification from the BAP layer of the upper IAB node 300 … the MT initiates processing for recovering the BH link, for example, RRC re-establishment processing. ¶0224 - Type 4x—“Indicating child nodes to perform RLF procedure”: This is implemented in a case where the parent transmits this indication, and in a case of receiving the indication, the child node should execute an RLF related procedure).
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.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-4, 10, 22 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro and further in view of Jung et al. (WO2020167012A1), Jung hereinafter.
Re. Claim 3, Fujishiro teaches Claim 1.
Yet, Fujishiro does not explicitly teach the IAB node is configured with fast MCG link recovery, and the method further comprises: if RLF in the MCG link is detected, initiating fast MCG link recovery procedure by transmitting MCG failure information to the MN via the SN and starting a timer; and stopping the timer when receiving based on a response received from the MN via the SN.
However, in the analogous art, Jung explicitly teaches the IAB node (¶10 - “wireless device”) is configured with fast MCG link recovery, (¶354 - In the current discussion of IAB, MCG fast recovery is being considered);
and the method further comprises: if RLF in the MCG link is detected, (Fig. 17 & ¶359 - the wireless device detects MCG RLF);
initiating fast MCG link recovery procedure by transmitting MCG failure information to the MN via the SN and starting a timer; (Fig. 17 & ¶361 - upon detecting the MCG RLF, the wireless device transmits information related to the MCG RLF to a secondary node, and starts a timer. ¶362 - For example, the message may be constructed by the SN RRC. ¶365 - the message may include information related to a cell group on which a RLF is detected. That is, the message may include information that the RLF is detected/occurred on the MCG, not on the SCG);
and stopping the timer when receiving based on a response received from the MN via the SN (¶374 - Alternatively, upon reception of the RRC message in response to the information for the MCG RLF from the secondary node while the timer is running, the wireless device may stop the timer and processing the RRC message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Jung to the teaching of Fujishiro. The motivation would be because there is a goal to prevent UE/IAB-nodes from getting stuck in delayed MN’s response or unreachable MN can be achieved easily and effectively (¶11, Jung).
Re. Claim 4, Fujishiro and Jung teach Claim 3.
Fujishiro further teaches at least one of:
the timer is configured as a finite value (¶0086 - In the operation pattern 1, the type 1/2 BH RLF notification is transmitted that includes configuration information specifying a predetermined time period (hereinafter referred to as the “timer configuration value”), and the re-establishment procedure is initiated if the timer expires and the SCG link is not available; (Fig. 1, 11 & ¶0064 - Secondly, in a case where the timer T310 expires without stopping the timer T310, the MT detects an RLF and starts a timer T311 (in other words, initiates RRC re-establishment processing), and executes cell selection processing to recover the BH link. ¶0066 - Note that when the IAB node 300 has dual connectivity, the MT separately detects BH RLFs in the MCG link and the SCG link. The failure in BH link recovery also includes a case in which the MT detects a BH RLF in both the MCG link and the SCG link and fails to recover from the BH RLF in both or one of the MCG link and the SCG link. Please also see ¶0068. Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features to be mapped because of the presence of “at least one of”).
or the timer is configured as infinity, and the re-establishment procedure is initiated if the timer is running and the SCG link is not available.
Re. Claim 10, Fujishiro and Jung teach Claim 3.
Fujishiro further teaches transmitting the RLF notification to the child node if the timer is running and failure of the SCG link is detected (Fig. 9 & ¶0095 - In step S206, in response to the failure in the recovery of the BH link in step S205, the BAP layer of IAB node 300-1 transmits the type 4 BH RLF notification to the IAB node 300-2. ¶0096 - In step S207, in response to receiving the type 4 BH RLF notification from the IAB node 300-1 before the predetermined timer expires (Examiner interprets “timer is running”), the MT of the IAB node 300-2 attempts to recover the BH link of the IAB node 300-2 (e.g., initiates the RRC re-establishment processing) … Note that … the MT of the IAB node 300-2 may attempt to recover the BH link by using transmission processing for an MCG failure indication or an SCG failure indication).
Re. Claim 22, Fujishiro teaches Claim 20.
Yet, Fujishiro does not explicitly teach the IAB node is configured with fast MCG link recovery; and the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: transmit MCG failure information to the MN via the SN and start a timer to initiate fast MCG link recovery based at least in part on RLF in the MCG link being detected; and stop the timer based at least in part on a response received from the MN via the SN.
However, in the analogous art, Jung explicitly teaches the IAB node (¶10 - “wireless device”) is configured with fast MCG link recovery; (¶354 - In the current discussion of IAB, MCG fast recovery is being considered);
and the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: transmit MCG failure information to the MN via the SN and start a timer to initiate fast MCG link recovery based at least in part on RLF in the MCG link being detected; (Fig. 17 & ¶359 - the wireless device detects MCG RLF. ¶361 - upon detecting the MCG RLF, the wireless device transmits information related to the MCG RLF to a secondary node, and starts a timer. ¶362 - For example, the message may be constructed by the SN RRC. ¶365 - the message may include information related to a cell group on which a RLF is detected. That is, the message may include information that the RLF is detected/occurred on the MCG, not on the SCG);
and stop the timer based at least in part on a response received from the MN via the SN (¶374 - Alternatively, upon reception of the RRC message in response to the information for the MCG RLF from the secondary node while the timer is running, the wireless device may stop the timer and processing the RRC message).
Re. Claim 28, Fujishiro teaches Claim 26.
Yet, Fujishiro does not explicitly teach the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus child node to receive the at least one indication as a time is started indication if an MCG link recovery timer starts.
However, in the analogous art, Jung explicitly teaches the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to receive the at least one indication as a time is started indication if an MCG link recovery timer starts (Fig. 17 & ¶361 - upon detecting the MCG RLF, the wireless device transmits information related to the MCG RLF to a secondary node, and starts a timer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Jung to the teaching of Fujishiro. The motivation would be because there is a goal to prevent UE/IAB-nodes from getting stuck in delayed MN’s response or unreachable MN can be achieved easily and effectively (¶11, Jung).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro and Jung, and further in view of Luo et al. (US2022/0174772A1), Luo hereinafter.
Re. Claim 7, Fujishiro and Jung teach Claim 3.
Yet, Fujishiro and Jung do not explicitly teach transmitting, to the child node, at least one of: a first indication of a pending failure if the MCG link fails and the SCG link is available; a second indication of the timer is started; or a third indication of the timer is running.
However, in the analogous art, Luo explicitly discloses transmitting, to the child node, at least one of: a first indication of a pending failure if the MCG link fails and the SCG link is available (Fig. 3, 4 & ¶0078 - Alternatively, if the parent node is in multi-connectivity, the parent node may perform link recovery through an SCG when the RLF occurs in an MCG… When the parent node cannot recover quickly, the parent node may transmit the link state information to the child node while initiating the connection reestablishment… ¶0085 - …the link state information includes at least one of: an RLF indication, an RRC reconfiguration failure indication, an RRC integrity check failure indication, a mobility failure indication, a synchronous reconfiguration failure indication, and a timer timeout indication. ¶0089 - …determining, by the second communication node, that a link failure occurs when the timer is timed out. Please also see ¶0093. Examiner interprets the indication of the timer timeout indication as a first indication of a pending failure since the second communication node will determine a link failure upon receiving this indication); a second indication of the timer is started; or a third indication of the timer is running. Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features to be mapped because of the presence of “at least one of”); a second indication of the timer is started; or a third indication of the timer is running.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Luo to the teachings of Fujishiro and Jung. The motivation would be because it provides efficient mechanisms for improving network capacity and coverage and meeting flexibility requirements of cell deployment at the same time (Luo, ¶0003).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro, and further in view of Luo.
Re. Claim 27, Fujishiro teaches Claim 26.
Yet, Fujishiro does not explicitly teach the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to receive indication of a pending failure if an MCG link fails and the SCG link is available.
However, in the analogous art, Luo explicitly teaches the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to receive indication of a pending failure if an MCG link fails and the SCG link is available (Fig. 3-4 & ¶0078 - Alternatively, if the parent node is in multi-connectivity, the parent node may perform link recovery through an SCG when the RLF occurs in an MCG… When the parent node cannot recover quickly, the parent node may transmit the link state information to the child node while initiating the connection reestablishment… ¶0085 - …the link state information includes at least one of: an RLF indication, an RRC reconfiguration failure indication, an RRC integrity check failure indication, a mobility failure indication, a synchronous reconfiguration failure indication, and a timer timeout indication. ¶0089 - …determining, by the second communication node, that a link failure occurs when the timer is timed out. Please also see ¶0093. Examiner interprets the indication of the timer timeout indication as a first indication of a pending failure since the second communication node will determine a link failure upon receiving this indication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Luo to the teaching of Fujishiro. The motivation would be because it provides efficient mechanisms for improving network capacity and coverage and meeting flexibility requirements of cell deployment at the same time (Luo, ¶0003).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro and further in view of Orsino et al. (US2022/0264687A1), Orsino hereinafter.
Re. Claim 29, Fujishiro teaches Claim 26.
Yet, Fujishiro does not explicitly teach the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to receive a timer is running indication if an MCG link recovery timer is running.
However, in the analogous art, Orsino explicitly teaches the at least one processor is configured to cause the child node to receive a timer is running indication if an MCG link recovery timer is running (Fig. 8, 10, 13 & ¶0004 - the indicating includes at least one indicator that includes an indication that the master cell group fast recovery procedure is supported, an indication that the user equipment use the master cell group fast recovery procedure when defined criteria are met, and an indication that the user equipment use the master cell group fast recovery procedure when a timer for the master cell group fast recovery procedure is present at the user equipment. ¶0017 - In some embodiments, the indicator includes a timer configuration corresponding to the master cell group fast recovery procedure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Orsino to the teaching of Fujishiro. The motivation would be because the invention describes operations corresponding to such methods include detecting a radio link failure on a master cell group and indicating to a user equipment whether to use a master cell group fast recovery procedure to avoid a radio resource control re-establishment (¶0003, Orsino).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hwang (US2023/0124364A1) – Please see Abstract, Fig. 1-14 & ¶0002-¶0269.
Fujishiro et al. (US2022/0264413A1) – Please see Abstract, Fig. 1-16 & ¶0002-¶0234.
Sedin et al. (US2023/0413088A1) – Please see Abstract, Fig. 1-20 & ¶0001-¶0482.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7673. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5pm. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571) 270-0422. 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.
/ALYSSA WILLIAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2465B /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights