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 Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 01/02/2026 have been considered for examination. Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-22 are pending in the instant application.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 01/02/2026 (see pages 7-8 of Remarks) in view of the amendments have been fully considered and is not persuasive. Therefore, the rejections will be maintained.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 10, Applicant argued:
Applicant argued, regarding the claim 1:
The UE of Xu does not provide, to the first cell, "an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure." Although Xu discloses RRC reestablishment (see par. 118), Xu does not propose that the request include "a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure."
Xu at most contemplates BS-side logic for determining a "failure reason" based on an RLF report, without relying at all on a UE reporting a failure cause. A base station determining a failure reason is not equivalent to a UE providing, in a request to re-establish a radio connection, a failure cause with a particular value, as recited in claim 1.
Xu, based on Paragraphs [0021] and [0023]-[0024] does not discuss providing, from a UE, a failure cause in connection with inter-RAT handover scenarios at all and the failure reasons of Xu can unambiguously correspond to a reconfiguration failure. Thus, Xu fails to disclose “providing, by the UE to the first cell … failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure.”
Based on Paragraph [0109] of Xu, Xu fails to disclose a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available.
Thus, Xu fails to disclose “providing, by the UE to the first cell, an indication of the failure …, a response message indicating whether handover failure.”
In response to Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding the part of the claim 1, recited as "detecting, by the UE, a failure to apply the configuration …, a response message indicating whether handover failure,” in the argument, Applicant said Xu fail to disclose this part. However, Examiner respectfully disagree.
Xu, in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0069]-[0098] and [0100]-[0118], teaches that in Paragraphs [0018]-[0023], Xu explains the introductory description for the RLF report, where it is note that the RLF report indicates either the failure of radio link or handover failure (HOF), or both, as shown in [0019] and further, UE indicates a network that UE determines and has RLF report information during a handover process or a process of RRC connection setup, as described in [0018]-[0019]. As described in Paragraph [0020], although the base station determines the failure reason based on the RLF report sent by the UE, it follows the RLF report of UE with the failure reason detected or determined by UE, (the base station does not determine the failure reason of RLF or HOF by itself, independently.) The further detail explanation can be found in Fig. 3 and Fig.4 and in Paragraphs [0069]-[0098] and [0100]-[0118].
Further, Xu, in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0069]-[0098] and [0100]-[0118], teaches that as described in Fig. 3 and 4 and in Paragraph [0069]-[0077] and [0100]-[0110], UE decides whether the RLF or HOF (since Xu explains the HOF by two separate categories: one is the radio link failure and the other is inter-RAT handover failure, Xu always explain HOF with the cases of two categories, separately.) is occurred or not within a short period and stores this information to report with necessary information (described in [0072]-[0075] and [0103]-[0106]), when the RLF or HOF is occurred by the various reasons. Further, for the RLF case with a target cell during handover process, in Fig. 3 and 4 and in Paragraphs [0076], [0084], and [0107]-[0110], if UE detects or decide that RLF is occurred with a target base station (the second cell) in a predefined time during handover process, UE indicates that UE has RLF report (or information), to the base station of the source cell (the first cell) with RRC message such as RRC connection re-establishment request message. Then, the base station of the source cell requests the UE to report the RLF information and the UE sends the RLF report with the stored necessary information in response to the request.
Further, for inter-RAT handover failure, in Fig. 3 and 4 and in Paragraphs [0070], [0076], [0084], [0107], and [0111]-[0113], when UE detects and determine whether a inter-RAT HOF is occurred in a short period (predefined) due to RAT type, cell information, reception time of the handover command message, etc., UE indicates that UE has RLF report (or information), to the base station of the source cell (the first cell) with RRC message such as RRC connection re-establishment request message. Then, the base station of the source cell requests the UE to report the RLF information and the UE sends the RLF report with the stored necessary information in response to the request.
By the reasoning in the above, clearly, Xu disclose the part of the claim 1, recited in the above and Examiner respectfully disagree with the argument.
Therefore, the 103 rejections in the previous office action will be maintained for this instant office action.
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.
Claims 1, 8-11, 12-15, 19, and 21-22 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Per Johan Mikael Johansson and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20130242898 A1, hereinafter “Johansson”) in a view of Lixiang Xu and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20150036512 A1, hereinafter “Xu”) and further in a view of Yu-Hsuan Guo and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20190037635 A1, hereinafter “Guo”).
Regarding claim 1, Johansson teaches that a method, in a user equipment (UE) connected to a first cell associated with a first radio access technology (RAT), for supporting a handover to a second cell associated with a second RAT different from the first RAT, the method comprising: receiving, by the UE, a configuration associated with the second cell in a handover request message; attempting, by the UE, to connect to the second cell; (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0086], teaches that Wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, can be considered as the first cell RAT1), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, can be considered as the second cell (target cell) RAT2). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. However, this HO (handover) command is sent too early. In step 1313, UE 1301 attempts to connect to the target network RAT2. However, the handover attempt fails due to too early HO command. In this observation, it is clear that the inter-RAT handover procedure can be processed that the UE may connect to the first RAT1, the first RAT1 may request the inter-RAT handover to the second (target) RAT2, the UE may receive the command (or the configuration) of the inter-RAT HO from the first RAT1, and based on the command, the UE may attempt to connect to the target network RAT2.)
However, Johansson does not explicitly teach that detecting, by the UE, a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell; providing, by the UE to the first cell, an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure; and receiving, by the UE. a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell; and transmitting, by the UE, a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available.
Xu teaches that detecting, by the UE, a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell; providing, by the UE to the first cell, an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure; and transmitting, by the UE, a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available (Xu, Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0019]-[0023], and [0101]-[0117], teaches that A failure occurring on a user equipment (UE), wherein the failure includes RLF (Radio Link Failure) or handover failure (Here, when UE applied the handover configuration to the target cell (RAT), RLF is occurred based on this configuration and UE detects that the requested handover is failed due to RLF); sending, by the UE an RLF report (Here, since the RLF report represents handover failure information, this RLF report (only the name can be confused) can be considered as the handover failure report. ) to a source access system of previous Inter-RAT handover if the failure occurs within a prescribed period of time after the previous Inter-RAT handover; The RLF report (handover report) includes a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell lastly serving the UE when the RLF occurs, or a cell identity and/or a RAT type of the target cell when the handover failure occurs; and the RLF report further includes: a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE attempts RRC reestablishment or the RRC connection setup at the first time after the failure, and a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE locates before the UE is handed over a failure cell; wherein the cell identity includes: a global cell identity (CGI/ECGI) or a physical cell identity (PCI) and frequency information. The report further includes determining, by a base station of the access system by which the RLF report is received, a failure reason according to the RLF report, wherein the failure reason is one of the following reasons: handover to an wrong cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, too late Inter-RAT handover, handover to an wrong RAT or a coverage hole, where the explanation of each case can be found in Paragraphs [0024]-[0027]. As shown in the steps 402, 404, and 405, when the UE re-accesses a cell which belongs to an access system from which the handover command is sent at the last time before failure, the UE sends the RLF report to the base station of the cell. In this step, the UE can indicate the base station that the UE has the RLF report information in the RRC connection setup request, the RRC connection setup complete, the RRC connection re-establishment request, the RRC connection reestablishment complete, the handover complete, the RRC connection reconfiguration complete or other RRC message. Here, although Xu does not show in detail the RRC reestablishment steps, the RRC connection re-establishment request can be considered as the request message by UE to re-establish a radio connection and the RRC connection reestablishment complete is considered as the response message of UE regarding to the configuration message for the reestablishment from the first cell (first RAT), as further shown in the below. After the indication is received, the base station can request the UE to report the RLF report information. The UE sends the stored RLF report to the base station. The reason of the RLF or the handover failure is decided by the access system which receives the RLF report from the UE, where the reason includes the too early Inter-RAT handover, the too late inter-RAT handover, and the handover to a wrong RAT, or coverage hole. Among them, if handover to the error cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, or handover to the error RAT is decided as the reason of the RLF or the handover failure is, the base station sends a handover report to the base station of the cell where the handover at the last time is triggered. Then, if the current base station is the base station of the cell where the handover is triggered at the last time, the message does not need to be sent. Further, based on this observation, the indication whether handover failure information is available can be configured in the report or as shown here, existing or non-existing handover failure information can be the indication, according to the reasons of the handover failure. Therefore, it is clear that UE detects a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell, provides to the first cell an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, where the request includes a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure (RLF) and transmits a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available, according to the configuration message from the first cell.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Xu to include the technique detecting, by the UE, a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell; providing, by the UE to the first cell, an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure; and transmitting, by the UE, a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available of Xu in the system of Johansson to provide the method for reporting RLF information including RLF information or handover failure information by the UE to the access system of the cell leading to the problem, to avoid adverse effect for the other RAT, to grantee to solve the problem in the RAT, and to improve the performance of the mobile communication system (Xu, see Paragraph [0054])
However, combination of Johansson and Xu does not explicitly teach that receiving, by the UE, a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell.
Guo teaches that receiving, by the UE, a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell; (Guo, in Fig. 19 and in Paragraphs [0536]-[0543], teaches that the option 1 in Fig. 19 shows the RRC reestablishment steps when occurring inter-RAT handover on the UE with RLF. As shown in the above, the UE could send the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message with the second identity for the RRC reestablishment. Based on this identity, the network node configures or derives from configured and/or pre-configured parameters. With the first identity included in a request message of a procedure used to re-establish a RRC connection, if the network or a prepared cell controlled by the network is able to distinguish the first identity, the network or the prepared cell control by the network can respond to the UE with a RRC connection re-establishment message (this configuration message to reestablish the radio connection with the first RAT (cell).). Based on this message, UE performs the RRC reestablishment and send the RRC connection reestablishment complete message to the network node (the first cell (RAT)) as a response of the configuration message, as shown in the above. Therefore, it is clear that UE receives a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell, as a response of the request message.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique receiving, by the UE, a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 8, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Guo further teaches that wherein transmitting of the request includes: transmitting a radio resource control (RRC) reestablishment request message including a reconfigurationFailure failure cause (Guo, in Paragraphs [0255], [0257], [0258], [0263], [0265], [0267], [0271], [0274], and [0275], teaches that upon the detection of the handover failure, the UE may initiate or request the RRC reestablishment procedure by using the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message and setting the reestablishmentCause parameter as handoverFailure (can be considered as a value indicating reconfigurationFailure). In this observation, it is clear that based on the detection of the handover failure, UE may initiate and request the RRC reestablishment procedure with reconfigurationFailure failure cause (namely, handoverFailure).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique wherein transmitting of the request includes: transmitting a radio resource control (RRC) reestablishment request message including a reconfigurationFailure failure cause of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 9, Johansson teaches that a user equipment (UE) connected to a first cell associated with a first radio access technology (RAT), and supporting a handover to a second cell associated with a second RAT different from the first RAT, the UE comprising processing hardware and a radio interface; the UE configured to; receive a configuration associated with the second cell in a handover request message, attempt to connect to the second cell, (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0086], teaches that Wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, can be considered as the first cell RAT1), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, can be considered as the second cell (target cell) RAT2). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. However, this HO (handover) command is sent too early. In step 1313, UE 1301 attempts to connect to the target network RAT2. However, the handover attempt fails due to too early HO command. In this observation, it is clear that the inter-RAT handover procedure can be processed that the UE may connect to the first RAT1, the first RAT1 may request the inter-RAT handover to the second (target) RAT2, the UE may receive the command (or the configuration) of the inter-RAT HO from the first RAT1, and based on the command, the UE may attempt to connect to the target network RAT2.)
However, Johansson does not explicitly teach that detect a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell, provide an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure, and receive a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell; and transmit a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available.
Xu teaches that detect a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell, provide an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure, and transmit a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available (Xu, Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0019]-[0023], and [0101]-[0117], teaches that a failure occurring on a user equipment (UE), wherein the failure includes RLF (Radio Link Failure) or handover failure (Here, when UE applied the handover configuration to the target cell (RAT), RLF is occurred based on this configuration and UE detects that the requested handover is failed due to RLF); sending, by the UE an RLF report (Here, since the RLF report represents handover failure information, this RLF report (only the name can be confused) can be considered as the handover failure report. ) to a source access system of previous Inter-RAT handover if the failure occurs within a prescribed period of time after the previous Inter-RAT handover; The RLF report (handover report) includes a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell lastly serving the UE when the RLF occurs, or a cell identity and/or a RAT type of the target cell when the handover failure occurs; and the RLF report further includes: a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE attempts RRC reestablishment or the RRC connection setup at the first time after the failure, and a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE locates before the UE is handed over a failure cell; wherein the cell identity includes: a global cell identity (CGI/ECGI) or a physical cell identity (PCI) and frequency information. The report further includes determining, by a base station of the access system by which the RLF report is received, a failure reason according to the RLF report, wherein the failure reason is one of the following reasons: handover to an wrong cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, too late Inter-RAT handover, handover to an wrong RAT or a coverage hole, where the explanation of each case can be found in Paragraphs [0024]-[0027]. As shown in the steps 402, 404, and 405, when the UE re-accesses a cell which belongs to an access system from which the handover command is sent at the last time before failure, the UE sends the RLF report to the base station of the cell. In this step, the UE can indicate the base station that the UE has the RLF report information in the RRC connection setup request, the RRC connection setup complete, the RRC connection re-establishment request, the RRC connection reestablishment complete, the handover complete, the RRC connection reconfiguration complete or other RRC message. Here, although Xu does not show in detail the RRC reestablishment steps, the RRC connection re-establishment request can be considered as the request message by UE to re-establish a radio connection and the RRC connection reestablishment complete is considered as the response message of UE regarding to the configuration message for the reestablishment from the first cell (first RAT), as further shown in the below. After the indication is received, the base station can request the UE to report the RLF report information. The UE sends the stored RLF report to the base station. The reason of the RLF or the handover failure is decided by the access system which receives the RLF report from the UE, where the reason includes the too early Inter-RAT handover, the too late inter-RAT handover, and the handover to a wrong RAT, or coverage hole. Among them, if handover to the error cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, or handover to the error RAT is decided as the reason of the RLF or the handover failure is, the base station sends a handover report to the base station of the cell where the handover at the last time is triggered. Then, if the current base station is the base station of the cell where the handover is
triggered at the last time, the message does not need to be sent. Further, based on this observation, the indication whether handover failure information is available can be configured in the report or as shown here, existing or non-existing handover failure information can be the indication, according to the reasons of the handover failure. Therefore, it is clear that UE detects a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell, provides to the first cell an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, where the request includes a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure (RLF) and transmits a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available, according to the configuration message from the first cell.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Xu to include the technique detecting, by the UE, a failure to apply the configuration associated with the second cell; providing, by the UE to the first cell, an indication of the failure to apply the configuration in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure; and transmitting, by the UE, a response message indicating whether handover failure information is available of Xu in the system of Johansson to provide the method for reporting RLF information including RLF information or handover failure information by the UE to the access system of the cell leading to the problem, to avoid adverse effect for the other RAT, to grantee to solve the problem in the RAT, and to improve the performance of the mobile communication system (Xu, see Paragraph [0054])
However, combination of Johansson and Xu does not explicitly teach that receive a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell.
Guo teaches that receive a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell; (Guo, in Fig. 19 and in Paragraphs [0536]-[0543], teaches that the option 1 in Fig. 19 shows the RRC reestablishment steps when occurring inter-RAT handover on the UE with RLF. As shown in the above, the UE could send the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message with the second identity for the RRC reestablishment. Based on this identity, the network node configures or derives from configured and/or pre-configured parameters. With the first identity included in a request message of a procedure used to re-establish a RRC connection, if the network or a prepared cell controlled by the network is able to distinguish the first identity, the network or the prepared cell control by the network can respond to the UE with a RRC connection re-establishment message (this configuration message to reestablish the radio connection with the first RAT (cell).). Based on this message, UE performs the RRC reestablishment and send the RRC connection reestablishment complete message to the network node (the first cell (RAT)) as a response of the configuration message, as described in the above. Therefore, it is clear that UE receives a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell, as a response of the request message.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique receive a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 10, Johansson teaches that a method for supporting an inter-RAT handover in a base station supporting a first cell of a first radio access technology (RAT), the method comprising: transmitting, by base station, to a user equipment (UE), a request for the UE to connect to a second cell of a second RAT different from the first RAT, the request including a configuration the UE is to use to connect to the second cell; (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0086], teaches that Wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, can be considered as the first cell RAT1), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, can be considered as the second cell (target cell) RAT2). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. However, this HO (handover) command is sent too early. In step 1313, UE 1301 attempts to connect to the target network RAT2. However, the handover attempt fails due to too early HO command. In this observation, it is clear that the inter-RAT handover procedure can be processed that the first base station with the first RAT1 may connect to UE, the first BS with the first RAT1 may request to UE the inter-RAT handover to the second base station (target base station) with RAT2 and may send to UE the command (or the configuration) of the inter-RAT HO, and based on the command, the UE may attempt to connect to the target base station with RAT2.) determining, by the base station and based on the response, that the UE was unable to apply the configuration; and performing, by the base station, a corrective action in response to the determining (Johansson, in Fig. 10 and in Paragraphs [0074]-[0075], teaches that FIG. 10 illustrates one embodiment of reporting inter-RAT HOF to the network due to too late handover command in a wireless communication network 1000. In this case, IRAT mobility is often done for service reasons and some types of mobility may be more likely to fail than other types, e.g., due to latency to connect to the target cell. Thus, the corrective action to fix problems may be to determine a better performing type of mobility. Thus, it is proposed that the IRAT HOF information to be recorded and reported in step 1015 includes the type of and reason for the purpose of mobility: handover, redirection, NACC (Network Assisted Cell Change), CSFB (Circuit-switched Fallback), Enhanced CSFB, and SRVCC (Single Radio Voice Call Continuity), etc. Therefore, it is clear that the base station determines the reason of handover failure based on the handover failure information report and according to the cause, perform the corrective action.)
Johansson does not explicitly teach that receiving, by the base station, a request from the UE to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a handover failure; transmitting, by the base station, a message to configure the radio connection with the UE; receiving, by the base station, a response to the message, the response indicating that handover failure information is not available; determining, by the base station and based on the response, that the UE was unable to apply the configuration; and performing, by the base station, a corrective action in response to the determining.
Xu teaches that receiving, by the base station, a request from the UE to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a handover failure; receiving, by the base station, a response to the message, the response indicating that handover failure information is not available; (Xu, Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0019]-[0023], and [0101]-[0117], teaches that a failure occurring on a user equipment (UE), wherein the failure includes RLF (Radio Link Failure) or handover failure (Here, when UE applied the handover configuration to the target cell (RAT), RLF is occurred based on this configuration and UE detects that the requested handover is failed due to RLF); sending, by the UE an RLF report (Here, since the RLF report represents handover failure information, this RLF report (only the name can be confused) can be considered as the handover failure report. ) to a source access system of previous Inter-RAT handover if the failure occurs within a prescribed period of time after the previous Inter-RAT handover; The RLF report (handover report) includes a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell lastly serving the UE when the RLF occurs, or a cell identity and/or a RAT type of the target cell when the handover failure occurs; and the RLF report further includes: a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE attempts RRC reestablishment or the RRC connection setup at the first time after the failure, and a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE locates before the UE is handed over a failure cell; wherein the cell identity includes: a global cell identity (CGI/ECGI) or a physical cell identity (PCI) and frequency information. The report further includes determining, by a base station of the access system by which the RLF report is received, a failure reason according to the RLF report, wherein the failure reason is one of the following reasons: handover to an wrong cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, too late Inter-RAT handover, handover to an wrong RAT or a coverage hole, where the explanation of each case can be found in Paragraphs [0024]-[0027]. As shown in the steps 402, 404, and 405, when the UE re-accesses a cell which belongs to an access system from which the handover command is sent at the last time before failure, the UE sends the RLF report to the base station of the cell. In this step, the UE can indicate the base station that the UE has the RLF report information in the RRC connection setup request, the RRC connection setup complete, the RRC connection re-establishment request, the RRC connection reestablishment complete, the handover complete, the RRC connection reconfiguration complete or other RRC message. Here, although Xu does not show in detail the RRC reestablishment steps, the RRC connection re-establishment request can be considered as the request message by UE to re-establish a radio connection and the RRC connection reestablishment complete is considered as the response message of UE regarding to the configuration message for the reestablishment from the first cell (first RAT), as further shown in the below. After the indication is received, the base station can request the UE to report the RLF report information. The UE sends the stored RLF report to the base station. The reason of the RLF or the handover failure is decided by the access system which receives the RLF report from the UE, where the reason includes the too early Inter-RAT handover, the too late inter-RAT handover, and the handover to a wrong RAT, or coverage hole. Among them, if handover to the error cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, or handover to the error RAT is decided as the reason of the RLF or the handover failure is, the base station sends a handover report to the base station of the cell where the handover at the last time is triggered. Then, if the current base station is the base station of the cell where the handover is
triggered at the last time, the message does not need to be sent. If too late Inter-RAT handover is determined as the reason of the RLF or the handover failure, the base station sends the handover report to the base station of the cell lastly serving the UE before the failure. If the current base station is the base station of the cell lastly serving the UE before the failure, the message does not need to be sent. Further, based on this observation, the indication whether handover failure information is available can be configured in the report or as shown here, existing or non-existing handover failure information can be the indication, according to the reasons of the handover failure. The base station may not receive the handover failure information for those cases and that indicates the handover failure information is not available for those cases. Therefore, it is clear that the base station receives a request from the UE to re-establish a radio connection, where the request includes a failure cause indicating a handover failure, and receives a response to the configuration message that indicates that handover failure information is not available.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Xu to include the technique receiving, by the base station, a request from the UE to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a handover failure; receiving, by the base station, a response to the message, the response indicating that handover failure information is not available of Xu in the system of Johansson to provide the method for reporting RLF information including RLF information or handover failure information by the UE to the access system of the cell leading to the problem, to avoid adverse effect for the other RAT, to grantee to solve the problem in the RAT, and to improve the performance of the mobile communication system (Xu, see Paragraph [0054])).
However, combination of Johansson and Xu does not explicitly teach that transmitting, by the base station, a message to configure the radio connection with the UE.
Guo teaches that transmitting, by the base station, a message to configure the radio connection with the UE; (Guo, in Fig. 19 and in Paragraphs [0536]-[0543], teaches that the option 1 in Fig. 19 shows the RRC reestablishment steps when occurring inter-RAT handover on the UE with RLF. As shown in the above, the UE could send the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message with the second identity for the RRC reestablishment. Based on this identity, the network node configures or derives from configured and/or pre-configured parameters. With the first identity included in a request message of a procedure used to re-establish a RRC connection, if the network or a prepared cell controlled by the network is able to distinguish the first identity, the network or the prepared cell control by the network can respond to the UE with a RRC connection re-establishment message (this configuration message to reestablish the radio connection with the first RAT (cell).). Based on this message, UE performs the RRC reestablishment and send the RRC connection reestablishment complete message to the network node (the first cell (RAT)) as a response of the configuration message, as described in the above. Therefore, it is clear that UE receives a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell, as a response of the request message.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique transmitting, by the base station, a message to configure the radio connection with the UE of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 10, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Guo further teaches that wherein the performing of the corrective action includes: transmitting a request to the UE for capability information associated with the UE (Guo, in Paragraph [0504], teaches that during the preparation of the handover, to configure HandoverPreparationinformation, the base station (source cell) can transmit the request to UE for UE capability information, to transfer the E-UTRA RRC information used by the target eNB during handover preparation, including UE capability information. When the base station cannot retrieve the configuration parameters based on the request message for reestablishment, it can transmit to request UE capability information, again, to perform the corrective action.).
Regarding claim 12, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 10, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Guo further teaches that wherein the transmitting of the message to configure the radio connection includes: transmitting a message to re-establish the radio connection with the UE (Guo, , in Paragraphs [0255], [0257], [0258], [0263], [0265], [0267], [0271], [0274], and [0275], teaches that upon the detection of the handover failure, the UE may initiate or request the RRC reestablishment procedure by using the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message and setting the reestablishmentCause parameter as handoverFailure. In this observation, it is clear that based on the detection of the handover failure, UE may request RRC connection reestablishment to the base station as shown in the above and if the base station may transmit the allowance message, the UE may initiate and request to the base station that the RRC reestablishment procedure with the indication of the handover failure, namely, the failure of the reconfiguration with the second cell.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique wherein the transmitting of the message to configure the radio connection includes: transmitting a message to re-establish the radio connection with the UE of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 13, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 10, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Johansson further teaches that wherein the transmitting of the message to configure the radio connection includes: transmitting a message to set up a new radio connection with the UE (Johansson, in Fig. 3 and in Paragraphs [0050], teaches that the in FIG. 3, the RRC re-establishment procedure fails because eNB 302 has not been prepared before the re-establishment attempt. In step 333, eNB 302 sends an RRC re-establishment reject message to UE 303. In one novel aspect, the RRC re-establishment reject message also contains correlation information {X}, which may be contained in a new information element (IE). Upon receiving the RRC reestablishment reject message, UE 303 goes to RRC_IDLE mode in step 341. NAS (Non-Access Stratum) triggers RRC connection establishment (RRC connection setup) immediately thereafter. In step 351, UE 303 performs RRC establishment (RRC connection setup) procedure with eNB 302. Therefore, it is clear that when the BS may reject the request of UE for RRC connection reestablishment, based on the higher layer message, the BS transmit the RRC connection setup message to perform the RRC connection setup procedure.).
Regarding claim 14, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 10, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Johansson further teaches that wherein the first cell and the second cell are associated with different base stations (Johansson, in Paragraph [0086], teaches that wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, considered as the first cell), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, considered as the second cell). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. Therefore, it is clear that the first cell and the second cell may be configured with two different RATs (namely, two different base stations), respectively.).
Regarding claim 15, Johansson teaches a base station configured to support a first cell of a first radio access technology (RAT), the base station comprising; processing hardware configured to implement a first module to provide a radio interface, and a second module configured to: transmit, to a UE, a configuration associated with a second cell in a handover request message, the second cell associated with a second RAT different from the first RAT, (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0086], teaches that Wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, can be considered as the first cell RAT1), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, can be considered as the second cell (target cell) RAT2). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. However, this HO (handover) command is sent too early. In step 1313, UE 1301 attempts to connect to the target network RAT2. However, the handover attempt fails due to too early HO command. In this observation, it is clear that the inter-RAT handover procedure can be processed that the first base station with the first RAT1 may connect to UE, the first BS with the first RAT1 may request to UE the inter-RAT handover to the second base station (target base station) with RAT2 and may send to UE the command (or the configuration) of the inter-RAT HO, and based on the command, the UE may attempt to connect to the target base station with RAT2.)
However, Johansson does not explicitly teach that receive, from the UE via the first cell, an indication that the UE failed to apply the configuration, included in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure.
Xu teaches that receive, from the UE via the first cell, an indication that the UE failed to apply the configuration, included in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure (Xu, Fig. 4 and in Paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0019]-[0023], and [0101]-[0117], teaches that a failure occurring on a user equipment (UE), wherein the failure includes RLF (Radio Link Failure) or handover failure (Here, when UE applied the handover configuration to the target cell (RAT), RLF is occurred based on this configuration and UE detects that the requested handover is failed due to RLF); sending, by the UE an RLF report (Here, since the RLF report represents handover failure information, this RLF report (only the name can be confused) can be considered as the handover failure report. ) to a source access system of previous Inter-RAT handover if the failure occurs within a prescribed period of time after the previous Inter-RAT handover; The RLF report (handover report) includes a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell lastly serving the UE when the RLF occurs, or a cell identity and/or a RAT type of the target cell when the handover failure occurs; and the RLF report further includes: a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE attempts RRC reestablishment or the RRC connection setup at the first time after the failure, and a cell identity and/or a RAT type of a cell where the UE locates before the UE is handed over a failure cell; wherein the cell identity includes: a global cell identity (CGI/ECGI) or a physical cell identity (PCI) and frequency information. The report further includes determining, by a base station of the access system by which the RLF report is received, a failure reason according to the RLF report, wherein the failure reason is one of the following reasons: handover to an wrong cell, too early Inter-RAT handover, too late Inter-RAT handover, handover to an wrong RAT or a coverage hole, where the explanation of each case can be found in Paragraphs [0024]-[0027]. As shown in the steps 402, 404, and 405, when the UE re-accesses a cell which belongs to an access system from which the handover command is sent at the last time before failure, the UE sends the RLF report to the base station of the cell. In this step, the UE can indicate the base station that the UE has the RLF report information in the RRC connection setup request, the RRC connection setup complete, the RRC connection re-establishment request, the RRC connection reestablishment complete, the handover complete, the RRC connection reconfiguration complete or other RRC message. Here, although Xu does not show in detail the RRC reestablishment steps, the RRC connection re-establishment request can be considered as the request message by UE to re-establish a radio connection and the RRC connection reestablishment complete is considered as the response message of UE regarding to the configuration message for the reestablishment from the first cell (first RAT), as further shown in the below. After the indication is received, the base station can request the UE to report the RLF report information. The UE sends the stored RLF report to the base station. The reason of the RLF or the handover failure is decided by the access system which receives the RLF report from the UE, where the reason includes the too early Inter-RAT handover, the too late inter-RAT handover, and the handover to a wrong RAT, or coverage hole. Therefore, it is clear that the base station receives from the UE via the first cell an indication that the UE failed to apply the configuration, included in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Xu to include the technique receive, from the UE via the first cell, an indication that the UE failed to apply the configuration, included in a request to re-establish a radio connection, the request including a failure cause indicating a reconfiguration failure of Xu in the system of Johansson to provide the method for reporting RLF information including RLF information or handover failure information by the UE to the access system of the cell leading to the problem, to avoid adverse effect for the other RAT, to grantee to solve the problem in the RAT, and to improve the performance of the mobile communication system (Xu, see Paragraph [0054])).
Regarding claim 19, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Johansson further teaches that wherein the first cell and the second cell are associated with different base stations (Johansson, in Paragraph [0086], teaches that wireless communication network 1300 comprises a UE 1301, a first RAT1 1302 (e.g., the source network, considered as the first cell), and a second RAT2 1303 (e.g., the target network, considered as the second cell). In step 1311, UE 1301 is connected to a source cell in the source network RAT1. In step 1312, UE 1301 receives a handover command from the source network RAT1 to connect to the target network RAT2. Therefore, it is clear that the first cell and the second cell may be configured with two different RATs (namely, two different base stations), respectively.).
Regarding claim 21, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Guo further teaches wherein to transmit the request to re-establish the radio connection, the second module is configured to: transmit a radio resource control (RRC) reestablishment request message including a reconfigurationFailure failure cause (Guo, in Paragraphs [0255], [0257], [0258], [0263], [0265], [0267], [0271], [0274], and [0275], teaches that upon the detection of the handover failure, the UE may initiate or request the RRC reestablishment procedure by using the RRCConnectionReestablishmentRequest message and setting the reestablishmentCause parameter as handoverFailure (can be considered as a value indicating reconfigurationFailure). In this observation, it is clear that based on the detection of the handover failure, UE may initiate and request the RRC reestablishment procedure with reconfigurationFailure failure cause (namely, handoverFailure).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Guo to include the technique wherein to transmit the request to re-establish the radio connection, the second module is configured to: transmit a radio resource control (RRC) reestablishment request message including a reconfigurationFailure failure cause of Guo in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient re-establishment procedure of Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection between the UE and a network node for UE to prevent entering RRC_INACTIVE state due to its failure. (Guo, see Paragraph [0005])).
Regarding claim 22, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Johansson further teaches that receiving, by the UE, a message to configure the radio connection with the first cell; (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraphs [0072] and [0086], teaches that after detecting and recording the radio link failure with the target RAT, RAT2, in step 1314 of Fig. 13, UE 1301 selects a target cell as RAT1 (source cell) and connects to RAT1. It means that, since the UE fails to connect to the original target cell RAT2, the UE reconnects (returns) to the source cell, RAT1. In this step, based on RLF report, corrective actions and adjustments can be adopted by the network to mitigate the failure, to return UE to RAT1 and UE performs the radio link (re)establishment procedure based on corrective actions and adjustments. Because HOF is triggered in RAT1, UE 1301 may report the IRAT (Inter-RAT) HOF to RAT1. Therefore, it is clear that since UE fails to connect to the second cell (RAT2), UE returns to or reconnect to the source cell (RAT1) by performing radio link (re)establishment procedure and report the IRAT HOF to the source cell.) and transmitting, by the UE, a response message, the response indicating that handover failure information is not available (Johansson, in Fig. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0073], teaches that in FIG. 9 and 13 and in Paragraph [0073], for IRAT mobility, the mobility measurements in step 912 have a particular meaning in detecting "blind" handovers (i.e., mobility that is commanded by the network without UE providing a measurement report with measurement results of the target cell as a trigger for the handover). The corrective action for failed blind handovers could be that UEs will be configured to do measurements before handover. The usage of blind handovers is particularly widespread in IRAT (Inter-RAT) scenarios where handover decision is based on service requirements. However, sometimes UE would be configured to do measurements, e.g., event-based measurements to trigger handover, but the UE would still be handover to other RAT blindly based on service trigger for handover. In such cases, while the handover is still regarded as blind, it may not be possible to deduce the blind handover by looking at the measurements report in the RLF report. Thus, it is proposed that the UE shall be able to report whether a handover is blind, i.e., if there was a measurement report for the target cell reported to the network before the mobility command. Therefore, it is clear that the UE may transmit the response indicating that handover failure information is not available, when the blind handover is applied.)
Claims 2, 5, 7, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Per Johan Mikael Johansson and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20130242898 A1, hereinafter “Johansson”) in a view of Lixiang Xu and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20150036512 A1, hereinafter “Xu”) and further in a view of Yu-Hsuan Guo and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20190037635 A1, hereinafter “Guo”) and further in a view of Hidekazu Tsuboi and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20230043592 A1, hereinafter “Tsuboi”).
Regarding claim 2, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein the detecting of the failure includes: determining that the UE is unable to apply the configuration.
Tsuboi teaches that wherein the detecting of the failure includes: determining that the UE is unable to apply the configuration (Tsuboi, in Fig. 26 and in Paragraphs [0792], teaches that in Step S2602, the processing unit 502 of the UE 122 may determine whether or not the first configuration is performed for the UE 122. In a case that the first configuration is performed for the UE 122, the processing unit 502 of the UE 122 may further determine whether or not a radio link failure is detected in the primary cell of the handover source. In a case that a radio link failure is not detected in the primary cell of the handover source, a part or all of the configurations of the handover target may be released, based on the fact that the first configuration is performed for the UE 122 and the fact that a radio link failure is not detected in the primary cell of the handover source. In this observation, it is clear that the detecting the failure can include to determine that the UE is unable to apply the configuration.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique wherein the detecting of the failure includes: determining that the UE is unable to apply the configuration of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Regarding claim 5, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein the receiving of the configuration includes receiving the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRA Command.
Tsuboi teaches that wherein the receiving of the configuration includes receiving the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand (Tsuboi, in Paragraph [0126], teaches that the handover in LTE and NR may be processing in which the UE 122 in the RRC connected state changes the serving cell. The handover may be performed in a case that the UE 122 receives an RRC message for indicating a handover from the eNB 102 and/or the gNB 108. The RRC message for indicating a handover may be a message indicating movement to a cell of another RAT such as either MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand. Therefore, it is clear that the received configuration information for the handover may be included in either MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique wherein the receiving of the configuration includes receiving the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Regarding claim 7, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that further comprising: detecting, by the UE, a potential failure of a radio connection associated with the first cell.
Tsuboi teaches that further comprising: detecting, by the UE, a potential failure of a radio connection associated with the first cell (Tsuboi, in Paragraphs [0160] and [0162], teaches that as an one of example for the radio link failure, for radio link monitoring, in a case of estimating that the radio link quality of the serving cell is worse than a specific threshold (Qout) over a specific period of time (e.g., TEvaluate_Qout=200 ms), based on, for example, information such as the received power of a reference signal received and/or the received power of the synchronization signal and/or the error rate of a packet, a physical layer processing unit of the terminal apparatus notifies "out-ofsync" to an RRC layer processing unit corresponding to an upper layer. In a case of estimating that the radio link quality of the serving cell exceeds a specific threshold (Qin) over a specific period of time (e.g., TEvaluate_Qin=l00 ms), based on, for example, information such as the received power of the reference signal received and/or the received power of the synchronization signal and/ or the error rate of the packet, the physical layer processing unit notifies the RRC layer processing unit corresponding to an upper layer of "insync." In this observation, it is clear that this radio link failure case can be a potential failure of a radio connection associated with the first cell.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique further comprising: detecting, by the UE, a potential failure of a radio connection associated with the first cell of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Regarding claim 16, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: determine that the UE is unable to apply the configuration.
Tsuboi teaches that wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: determine that the UE is unable to apply the configuration (Tsuboi, in Fig. 26 and in Paragraphs [0792], teaches that in Step S2602, the processing unit 502 of the UE 122 may determine whether or not the first configuration is performed for the UE 122. In a case that the first configuration is performed for the UE 122, the processing unit 502 of the UE 122 may further determine whether or not a radio link failure is detected in the primary cell of the handover source. In a case that a radio link failure is not detected in the primary cell of the handover source, a part or all of the configurations of the handover target may be released, based on the fact that the first configuration is performed for the UE 122 and the fact that a radio link failure is not detected in the primary cell of the handover source. In this observation, it is clear that the detecting the failure can include to determine that the UE is unable to apply the configuration.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: determine that the UE is unable to apply the configuration of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Regarding claim 18, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein to receive the configuration, the second module is configured to: receive the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand.
Tsuboi teaches that wherein to receive the configuration, the second module is configured to: receive the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand (Tsuboi, in Paragraph [0126], teaches that the handover in LTE and NR may be processing in which the UE 122 in the RRC connected state changes the serving cell. The handover may be performed in a case that the UE 122 receives an RRC message for indicating a handover from the eNB 102 and/or the gNB 108. The RRC message for indicating a handover may be a message indicating movement to a cell of another RAT such as either MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand. Therefore, it is clear that the received configuration information for the handover may be included in either MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique wherein to receive the configuration, the second module is configured to: receive the configuration in a MobilityFromNRCommand or a MobilityFromEUTRACommand of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Regarding claim 20, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein the second module is further configured to: detect a potential failure of the radio connection associated with the first cell.
Tsuboi teaches that wherein the second module is further configured to: detect a potential failure of the radio connection associated with the first cell (Tsuboi, in Paragraphs [0160] and [0162], teaches that as an one of example for the radio link failure, for radio link monitoring, in a case of estimating that the radio link quality of the serving cell is worse than a specific threshold (Qout) over a specific period of time (e.g., TEvaluate_Qout=200 ms), based on, for example, information such as the received power of a reference signal received and/or the received power of the synchronization signal and/or the error rate of a packet, a physical layer processing unit of the terminal apparatus notifies "out-ofsync" to an RRC layer processing unit corresponding to an upper layer. In a case of estimating that the radio link quality of the serving cell exceeds a specific threshold (Qin) over a specific period of time (e.g., TEvaluate_Qin=l00 ms), based on, for example, information such as the received power of the reference signal received and/or the received power of the synchronization signal and/ or the error rate of the packet, the physical layer processing unit notifies the RRC layer processing unit corresponding to an upper layer of "insync." In this observation, it is clear that this radio link failure case can be a potential failure of a radio connection associated with the first cell.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Tsuboi to include the technique wherein the second module is further configured to: detect a potential failure of the radio connection associated with the first cell of Tsuboi in the system of Johansson to provide the efficient mobility processing to reduce the user data interruption during handover between cells for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) scheme. (Tsuboi, see Paragraph [0022], [0023], and [0034])).
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Per Johan Mikael Johansson and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20130242898 A1, hereinafter “Johansson”) in a view of Lixiang Xu and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20150036512 A1, hereinafter “Xu”) and further in a view of Yu-Hsuan Guo and et. al. (USPub. No.: US 20190037635 A1, hereinafter “Guo”) and further in a view of Pradeepa Ramachandra and et. al. (Int.Pub. No.: WO 2021154142 A1, hereinafter “Ramachandra”).
Regarding claim 3, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 1, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein the detecting of the failure includes: starting a timer in response to attempting to connect to the second cell; and determining that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell before the timer expires.
Ramachandra teaches that wherein the detecting of the failure includes: starting a timer in response to attempting to connect to the second cell; and determining that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell before the timer expires (Ramachandra, in Page 25, lines 8-20, teaches that Consider the scenarios wherein the UE is configured with multiple CHO (Conditional Handover, it can be considered as a multi-cell handover) commands, each associated to different target cell candidates. The condition associated with a first target cell is fulfilled and the UE applies a stored CHO target configuration (i.e. a stored RRCReconfiguration), starts timer T304, and attempts to perform random access towards that first candidate target cell while timer T304 is running. However, the UE fails to perform the random access successfully, due to either timer T304 expiring or the UE reaching a maximum number of random-access attempts. These may be considered as two cases of handover failure during CHO execution. In addition to these cases, while the UE is monitoring CHO conditions, the network may provide the UE with a HO command (i.e. an RRCReconfiguration containing a reconfiguration With Sync) for another target cell. If the UE tries to access this target cell, a failure may also occur for any of these reasons. All these are HO failure cases while the UE has stored CHO configurations for CHO target candidates. Another failure case is when the UE is monitoring CHO (i.e., it has stored CHO candidate target cell configurations) and RLF is detected (e.g., timer T3 l O expires and/or maximum number of random-access attempts are reached). In this observation, it is clear that detecting the failure can be occurred when the timer is expired or the random-access attempts of UE is reached to the maximum, even though the timer is running.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Ramachandra to include the technique wherein the detecting of the failure includes: starting a timer in response to attempting to connect to the second cell; and determining that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell before the timer expires of Ramachandra in the system of Johansson to provide improvements to mobility operation such as handovers between a source cell and a target cell. (Ramachandra, see Page 6, lines 30-33)).
Regarding claim 17, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo teaches the features defined in the claim 9, -refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
However, combination of Johansson, Xu, and Guo does not teach that wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: start a timer when the UE attempts to connect to the second cell; and determine that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell when the timer expires.
Ramachandra teaches that wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: start a timer when the UE attempts to connect to the second cell; and determine that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell when the timer expires (Ramachandra, in Page 25, lines 8-20, teaches that Consider the scenarios wherein the UE is configured with multiple CHO (Conditional Handover, it can be considered as a multi-cell handover) commands, each associated to different target cell candidates. The condition associated with a first target cell is fulfilled and the UE applies a stored CHO target configuration (i.e. a stored RRCReconfiguration), starts timer T304, and attempts to perform random access towards that first candidate target cell while timer T304 is running. However, the UE fails to perform the random access successfully, due to either timer T304 expiring or the UE reaching a maximum number of random-access attempts. These may be considered as two cases of handover failure during CHO execution. In addition to these cases, while the UE is monitoring CHO conditions, the network may provide the UE with a HO command (i.e. an RRCReconfiguration containing a reconfiguration With Sync) for another target cell. If the UE tries to access this target cell, a failure may also occur for any of these reasons. All these are HO failure cases while the UE has stored CHO configurations for CHO target candidates. Another failure case is when the UE is monitoring CHO (i.e., it has stored CHO candidate target cell configurations) and RLF is detected (e.g., timer T3 l O expires and/or maximum number of random-access attempts are reached). In this observation, it is clear that detecting the failure can be occurred when the timer is expired or the random-access attempts of UE is reached to the maximum, even though the timer is running.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Johansson and Ramachandra to include the technique wherein to detect the failure, the second module is configured to: start a timer when the UE attempts to connect to the second cell; and determine that the UE is unable to connect to the second cell when the timer expires of Ramachandra in the system of Johansson to provide improvements to mobility operation such as handovers between a source cell and a target cell. (Ramachandra, see Page 6, lines 30-33)).
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 JAEYOUNG KWAK whose telephone number is (703)756-1768. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM -5 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, Kevin Bates can be reached at 571-272-3980. 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.
/JAEYOUNG KWAK/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights