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
This office action has been changed in response to the amendment filed on 7/16/2026.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 15, 17 and 21 have been amended. Claims 28-34 are newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Of specific note to Vakeesar, Vakeesar refers to History Information (Page 20 lines 20-31) as highlighted in the Applicant’s remarks. (Page 7) Vakeesar further states the UE History Information is “as defined in TS 38.300 and TS 38.413”. 3GPP TS 38.413 v15.7.0 (2020-03) on page 154 defines the UE History as below:
PNG
media_image1.png
239
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, when Vakeesar is referring to UE History Information, it is referring to the last 16 cells the UE has been served by. The Examiner is not referring to the Handover Restriction List as suggested by the Applicant. The Examiner has included the specification for the Applicant’s convenience.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant’s specification provides no description of any prediction occurring on a “lane-by-lane” basis. Claim 29 is rejected as being dependent upon claim 28 and fails to correct the deficiency of claim 28.
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, 3, 15, 17, 21-25 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO2020/114569A1 hereinafter, Vakeesar) in view of Kaplan et al. (US-6,947,835 hereinafter, Kaplan).
Regarding claim 1, Vakeesar teaches an information processing device (Fig. 9 [150]) comprising a processor (Fig. 9 [920]) configured to:
acquire, from Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) (Fig. 1 [130]) which is different from the information processing device (Fig. 1 [150]), information that includes handover information between a UE and a base station; (Page 20 lines 25-27 “Additionally, a UE specific Handover Restriction list, History Information, UE Registration Area can be passed on to the prediction function network node 150 by the AMF 130/ SMF”)
and predict the cells that will encounter the UE based on the location and intended trajectory. (Fig. 5 [Step 15] and Page 20 line 33 through Page 21 line 14)
Vakeesar differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting identify, based on the information, an order of locations through which the UE has moved, each of the locations being defined one by one for each period during which the UE stays in a cell.
In an analogous art, Kaplan teaches a system and method for monitoring cellular communication (Abstract) that includes collecting handover history information between base stations for a UE; (Fig. 5 [Handover Timing Table], Col. 4 lines 26-32 and Col. 6 lines 19-25)
identify, based on the information, an order of locations through which the UE has moved (Fig. 5 [Time] which corresponds to the handovers), each of the locations being defined one by one for each period during which the UE stays in a cell. (Fig. 1 [A1-A3, B1-B3, C1-C3] define the base stations/coverage and the time in each location is the time between handovers as seen in Fig. 5 [Time])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Vakeesar after modifying it to incorporate the ability to collect handover information between base stations for a UE and identify an order of locations through which the UE has moved of Kaplan since it enables the network to prepare for traffic loads in different time frames at specific locations (Kaplan Col. 1 lines 16-19) in a cost effective manner. (Kaplan Col. 3 lines 8-18)
Regarding claim 3, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches wherein the handover information includes information on a history of switching between a plurality of base stations, one of which is the base station as the vehicle moves. (Vakeesar Page 20 lines 25-27 “Additionally, a UE specific Handover Restriction list, History Information, UE Registration Area can be passed on to the prediction function network node 150 by the AMF 130/ SMF” and Raymond Page 3 [0057] “The prediction engine 304 can receive data corresponding to past state 402 and current state 404 of the communication network 110 (e.g., including monitored travel patterns of user devices and associated handovers, quality of service metrics, cell resource utilization, or the like)”)
Regarding claims 15 and 17, the limitations of claims 15 and 17 are rejected as being the same reasons set forth above in claims 1 and 3. (See additionally Vakeesar Page 28 line 31 through Page 29 line 6)
Regarding claim 21, the limitations of claim 21 are rejected as being the same reasons set forth above in claim 1. See additionally Vakeesar Page 18 line 35 through Page 19 line 6.
Regarding claim 22, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches wherein the processor is configured to determine the movement direction information of the UE based on the order. (Vakeesar Page 20 lines 25-27 “Additionally, a UE specific Handover Restriction list, History Information, UE Registration Area can be passed on to the prediction function network node 150 by the AMF 130/ SMF” and Kaplan Claim 5 and Fig. 1 note: routes have specific directions, see Col. 5 lines 19-21)
Regarding claims 23-25, the limitations of claims 23-25 are rejected as being the same reasons set forth above in claim 22.
Regarding claim 32, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches wherein the processor is configured to generate definitions for traveling routes of the UE by a machine learning model that has analyzed historical network data. (Kaplan Col. 4 lines 58 and Col. 5 line 14 and Col. 5 line 35-55)
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raymond (US-2022/0303855) in view of Kaplan et al. (US-6,947,835 hereinafter, Kaplan) and Vakeesar et al. (WO2020/114569A1 hereinafter, Vakeesar).
Regarding claim 8, Raymond teaches an information processing system (Fig. 1) comprising:
a first device (Fig. 1 [102]) provided with a storage unit (Fig. 7 [701]) and a first processor (Fig. 7 [703]) configured to acquire information that includes handover information between a UE and a base station and store the handover information in the first storage unit; (Page 3 [0057] “The prediction engine 304 can receive data corresponding to past state 402 and current state 404 of the communication network 110 (e.g., including monitored travel patterns of user devices and associated handovers, quality of service metrics, cell resource utilization, or the like)” and
a second device provided with a second processor (Page 5 [0073]) configured to:
receive the information, and identify, based on the information, an order in which the UE moves positions based on the information, each of the locations being defined one by one for each period during which the UE stays in a cell (Page 3 [0057] “The prediction engine 304 can receive data corresponding to past state 402 and current state 404 of the communication network 110 (e.g., including monitored travel patterns of user devices and associated handovers” i.e. where the vehicle was and is now provides an order of positions), and
predict location information of the UE and movement direction information of the UE. (Page 3 [0057] “use trained machine learning or other AI model(s) to output predicted state 406 of the communication network 110 (e.g., including estimated travel patterns of user devices and associated handovers, estimated quality of service metrics, estimated cell resource utilization, or the like).” and Pages 3-4 [0060])
Raymond differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting information that includes handover history information between base stations for a UE and store the handover history information in the first storage unit.
In an analogous art, Kaplan teaches a system and method for monitoring cellular communication (Abstract) that includes collecting handover history information between base stations for a UE; (Fig. 5 [Handover Timing Table], Col. 4 lines 26-32 and Col. 6 lines 19-25)
identify, based on the information, an order of locations through which the UE has moved (Fig. 5 [Time] which corresponds to the handovers), each of the locations being defined one by one for each period during which the UE stays in a cell. (Fig. 1 [A1-A3, B1-B3, C1-C3] define the base stations/coverage and the time in each location is the time between handovers as seen in Fig. 5 [Time])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Raymond after modifying it to incorporate the ability to collect handover information between base stations for a UE and identify an order of locations through which the UE has moved of Kaplan since it enables the network to prepare for traffic loads in different time frames at specific locations (Kaplan Col. 1 lines 16-19) in a cost effective manner. (Kaplan Col. 3 lines 8-18)
Raymond in view of Kaplan discloses that the information processing device can communicate with the AMF (Raymond Page 3 [0049]), but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting acquiring from the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF), which is different from the information processing system, information that includes handover information between the UE and a base station.
In an analogous art, Vakeesar teaches an information processing system (Fig. 9 [150]) comprising a processor (Fig. 9 [920]) configured to:
acquire, from Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) (Fig. 1 [130]) which is different from the information processing device (Fig. 1 [150]), information that includes handover information between a UE and a base station. (Page 20 lines 25-27 “Additionally, a UE specific Handover Restriction list, History Information, UE Registration Area can be passed on to the prediction function network node 150 by the AMF 130/ SMF”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Raymond in view of Kaplan after modifying it to incorporate the ability to receive handover information from an AMF of Vakeesar since being able to predict where mobile devices are traveling enables ensuring QOS requirements can be met to continue providing a session to the UE along the path. (Vakeesar Page 20 line 33 through Page 21 line 26)
Regarding claim 10, Raymond in view of Kaplan and Vakeesar teaches wherein the handover information includes information on a history of switching between a plurality of base stations, one of which is the base station as the vehicle moves. (Raymond Page 3 [0057] “The prediction engine 304 can receive data corresponding to past state 402 and current state 404 of the communication network 110 (e.g., including monitored travel patterns of user devices and associated handovers, quality of service metrics, cell resource utilization, or the like)” and Vakeesar Page 20 lines 25-27 “Additionally, a UE specific Handover Restriction list, History Information, UE Registration Area can be passed on to the prediction function network node 150 by the AMF 130/ SMF”)
Claims 26, 27 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar in view of Kaplan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiba et al. (US-2024/0298232 hereinafter, Chiba).
Regarding claims 26 and 27, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches the limitations of claim 1 above including a NWDAF (Vakeesar Fig. 3 [140]) and the ability to identify, based on the information and statistical information (i.e. handover information includes two base stations which can qualify as a “log”), an order of locations through which the UE has moved (Kaplan Fig. 1, Fig. 5 and Col. 5 lines 19-21), but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting acquire statistical information, the statistical information including log information of base stations that have communicated with the UE, from an NWDAF.
In an analogous art, Chiba teaches a method and system for shortening the switching time in an overlapping area of communication cells (Abstract and Page 2 [0014]) that includes acquiring, from a Network Data Analytics Function (NWDAF) (Page 5 [0041] “NWDAF”), statistical information (Page 5 [0041]), the statistical information including log information of base stations that have communicated with the UE. (Page 5 [0041] “NWDAF collects and accumulates activity history data (including history information on the base station to which the communication device 2 was connected and the location of the communication device 2) on various activities performed on the network by a number of communication devices 2 connected to the network, and utilizes the analysis results for traffic control on the network” and [0043] “from the core network CN (NWDAF etc.) and/or the database 4, statistical information on the activities on the network by mainly an unspecified number of communication devices 2 (including statistical information on the base stations to which they are connected) and/or historical information on the physical locations of mainly an unspecified number of communication devices 2 can be acquired”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Vakeesar in view of Kaplan after modifying it to incorporate the ability to acquire statistical information including a log of base stations to communicate with a UE from a NWDAF of Chiba since the NWDAF is responsible for collecting and analyzing historical data of base stations connected to UEs and the UE locations. (Chiba Page 5 [0041])
Regarding claim 34, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan and Chiba teaches wherein the processor is further configured to transmit a warning message to the UE with a priority level assigned based on whether the predicted location and movement direction place the UE behind or ahead of a traffic congestion location. (Chiba Fig. 11 [1120 & 1125] and Page 18 [0178-0181])
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar in view of Kaplan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujito et al. (US-2012/0258719 hereinafter, Fujito).
Regarding claim 33, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the processor is configured to acquire the handover history information directly from the base stations.
In an analogous art, Fujito teaches a radio base station connection and establishment method and system that includes the ability to acquire handover history information from base station. (Page 1 [0012])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Vakeesar in view of Kaplan after modifying it to incorporate the ability to receive handover information directly from a base station of Fujito since storing handover records at the base station enables the base station to establish connections with the most likely handover destinations, thereby saving network resources. (Fujito Page 1 [0010])
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar in view of Kaplan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsuboi et al. (US-2021/0105605 hereinafter, Tsuboi).
Regarding claim 30, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches the limitations of claim 1, but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the base stations include a primary cell communicating in a first frequency band, and a secondary cell communicating in a secondary frequency band, and the processor is further configured to acquire the handover history information such that the handover history information includes both information from the primary cell and information from the secondary cell, to predict the location information and the movement direction information of the UE.
In an analogous art, Tsuboi teaches a method and system for receiving mobile history information for primary cells and secondary cells (Page 3 [0039]) that operate on different frequencies. (Pages 2-3 [0031])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Vakeesar in view of Kaplan after modifying it to incorporate the ability to receive handover history information that includes primary and second cells operating on different frequency bands of Tsuboi since by providing a complete mobile history provides a more useful insight into the mobile environment. (Tsuboi Page 1 [0010-0011])
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar in view of Kaplan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Speicher et al. (US-2021/0084558 hereinafter, Speicher).
Regarding claim 31, Vakeesar in view of Kaplan teaches the limitations of claim 1 including that the network is a 5G network (Vakeesar Page 11 lines 32-33), but differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting wherein the handover history information comprises handovers within a first frequency band of less than 3 GHz and handovers within a second frequency band of 3 GHz or more.
In an analogous art, Speicher teaches a method and system for load balancing and providing handover efficiency in a wireless communications network (Abstract) that includes a 5G network that operates in a frequency band of less than 3 GHz and in a second frequency band of 3 GHz or more. (Page 9 [0083])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Vakeesar in view of Kaplan after modifying it to incorporate the ability to operate in a frequency band of less than 3 GHz and in a second frequency band of 3 GHz or more of Speicher since 5G networks can be deployed in both frequency spectrums and being able to provide a mobile history that includes both frequency spectrums provides a more useful insight into the mobile environment for planning handovers.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW C SAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8099. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 EST.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at (571)272-4177. 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.
/Matthew C Sams/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights