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 Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/14/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Deenoo and Kim fail to disclose ‘initiating, by the UE, a SCG failure report procedure to report the SCG failure,’ ‘MAC reset for the SCG is not performed, based on that the SCG failure report procedure is initiated due to beam failure of a PSCell while the SCG is deactivated,’ and ‘the MAC reset includes (i) stopping a Time Alignment Timer for the SCG and (ii) considering the Time Alignment Timer for the SCG as expired,’" because they disclose “a WTRU may delay (e.g., may perform at a later time) a beam failure indication and/or beam failure recovery for a dormant SCG.”.
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees. “delay … beam failure recovery” suggests that beam failure recovery is not performed.
Other arguments are moot due to the fact that all independent claims have been significantly amended, to which new ground rejections have been made as shown below.
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 1-9, 12-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deenoo (US 20220394583 A1) in view of Kim (US 20240129991 A1).
For claim 1, Deenoo discloses a method performed by a wireless device in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
deactivating, by a User Equipment (UE), a Secondary Cell Group (SCG) (“[0132] A WTRU may be configured to deactivate an SCG based on one or more preconfigured triggers” in view of “[0127] …”);
initiating, by the UE, a SCG failure report procedure to report the SCG failure (“[0187] … the WTRU may initial a SCG failure procedure (e.g., transmitting a SCGFailureInformation message to the MN).”),
wherein a reset for the SCG is not performed (“[0116] … A WTRU may delay … beam failure recovery for a dormant SCG.” or “[0128] … A WTRU may not report a beam failure or receive a RACH configuration … .” in view of “[0098] … A WTRU may be configured to apply a SCG configuration if a SCG failure is detected. …”; note that apply a new SCG configuration is a kind of reset), based on that the SCG failure report procedure is initiated due to beam failure of a Primary SCG Cell (PSCell) while the SCG is deactivated (“[0184] … The WTRU may trigger a SCG failure (e.g., a SCG RLF, a CPAC failure, etc.) if CPAC is configured for the WTRU. … [0185] … The WTRU may initiate a SCG failure procedure (e.g., transmitting a SCG failure indication such as a SCGFailureInformation message) to a MN”;
wherein the reset is related to Time Alignment Timer (“[0111] … A WTRU may perform a RACH procedure or send an SR to a dormant SCG based on one or more of the following. The WTRU may perform a RACH procedure or send an SR to the dormant SCG based on a timing advance timer (TAT) associated with the MCG and/or SCG (e.g., the WTRU may perform the RACH if a TAT expires at the SCG).”);
transmitting, by the UE, a SCG failure information message (“[0187] … the WTRU may initial a SCG failure procedure (e.g., transmitting a SCGFailureInformation message to the MN).”); and
activating, by the UE, the SCG without a random access procedure, based on the TAT being running (“[0128] A WTRU may not report a beam failure or receive a RACH configuration, and still perform beam failure recovery (e.g., with an original or existing RACH configuration) at activation of the SCG … by utilizing a stored RACH configuration … if the SCG was placed in a dormant state …”).
Media Access Control (MAC), wherein the MAC reset includes (i) stopping a Time Alignment Timer and (ii) considering the Time Alignment Timer for the SCG as expired;
Deenoo is silent but Kim, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, discloses that RACH/reset procedure includes a Media Access Control (MAC) reset procedure (suggested by “[0547] If the MAC layer device has or receives the uplink allocated for new transmission, the MAC layer device operates as follows. [0548] 1> If the uplink transmission resources are first uplink transmission resources allocated for new transmission after the last MAC reset procedure …”) and wherein the MAC reset includes (i) stopping a Time Alignment Timer and (ii) considering the Time Alignment Timer for the SCG as expired (“[0714] … when the TAT has not stopped or expired, the UE may not trigger or perform the random access procedure. …”; note random access procedure is a kind of reset). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Kim above to the wireless communication system by Deenoo to yield a predictable result of facilitating failure recovery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combination Deenoo and Kim for the benefit of facilitating failure recovery of wireless communication ([0548] of Kim).
Claim 16 is rejected because it is a claim of a wireless device performing the method of claim 1 and has the same subject matter.
Claim 20 is rejected because it is a claim of a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded instructions that performs the method of claim 1 and has the same subject matter.
As to claims 2 and 17, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claims 1 and 16, Kim further discloses: wherein keeping, by the UE, the Time Alignment Timer running, upon deactivating the SCG (“[0714] … when the TAT has not stopped or expired, the UE may not trigger or perform the random access procedure. This is because, when the TAT is running, the signal synchronization with the secondary cell group is achieved or maintained, and thus in this case an unnecessary random access procedure may be performed. …”; note that “TAT not stopped or expired” suggests “TAT running”). The motivation of combining of Deenoo and Kim is same as stated in the corresponding parent claim.
As to claims 4 and 19, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claims 1 and 16, Deenoo further discloses:
receiving, by the UE, from a network, a configuration for beam failure detection for the SCG (suggested by “[0135] … the WTRU may determine whether the SCG or SCG configuration is acceptable based on whether a beam failure is detected in the PSCell of the SCG, …”).
As to claim 5, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, Deenoo further discloses:
detecting, by the UE, a radio link failure of the PSCell in the SCG (“[0135] … the WTRU may determine whether the SCG or SCG configuration is acceptable based on whether a beam failure is detected in the PSCell of the SCG, …”);
initiating, by the UE, a SCG failure information procedure to report the SCG failure (“[0135] …The WTRU may perform beam failure detection on the PSCell of a dormant SCG and may activate the dormant SCG (e.g., to perform beam failure recovery)”); and
performing, by the UE, a MAC reset procedure (as disclosed by the parent claim), wherein the MAC reset procedure includes stopping a Time Alignment Timer for the SCG (“[0111] … the WTRU may perform the RACH if a TAT expires at the SCG …”; note that “TAT expires” suggest TAT “stopping”).
As to claim 6, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 5, Deenoo further discloses:
determining, by the UE, that a random access procedure is needed for activation of the SCG, based on the Time Alignment Timer is expired (“[0111] … The WTRU may perform a RACH procedure or send an SR to the dormant SCG based on a timing advance timer (TAT) associated with the MCG and/or SCG (e.g., the WTRU may perform the RACH if a TAT expires at the SCG). …”).
As to claim 7, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 6, Deenoo further discloses: activating the SCG by performing, by the UE, a random access procedure (“[0080] … a WTRU may perform CHO to a target and may decide to activate, suspend, or release a current SCG configuration depending on a linkage of the SCG configuration with the target. …” and “[0111] … The WTRU may perform a RACH procedure or send an SR to the dormant SCG based on a timing advance timer (TAT) associated with the MCG and/or SCG …”).
As to claim 8, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 5, Deenoo further discloses: receiving, by the UE from a network, a configuration for radio link failure detection for the SCG (FIG. 1, step 5, WTRU receiving “Beam failure recovery resources”; note that resources are configuration parameters for beam/link failure).
As to claim 9, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, further discloses:
wherein Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) monitoring and/or Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) transmission for the SCG are not performed by the UE, while the SCG is deactivated (Deenoo: “[0106] … a WTRU may perform channel quality indicator (CQI)/radio resource management (RRM) measurements but may not decode a PDCCH …” and “[0132] A WTRU may be configured to deactivate an SCG based on one or more preconfigured triggers. A WTRU may apply one or more triggers described herein (e.g., described in relation to conditional PSCell change) to the case of deactivating an SCG …” and Kim: “[0201] … A cell or a BWP of the cell for which the channel measurement result is reported, a cell, and transmission resources of the cell (for example, a PUCCH or a PUSCH) through which the report is transmitted may be configured in the UE for each cell or each BWP through the RRC message.”). The motivation of combining of Deenoo and Kim is same as stated in the corresponding parent claim.
As to claim 12, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, Deenoo further discloses:
receiving, from a network, (1) a radio resource control (RRC) Reconfiguration message (“[0069] … The RRC message (e.g., the RRC reconfiguration message) may be associated with (e.g., include information for) SCG addition, SCG change or modification, and/or SCG release.”) and/or (2) an RRC Resume message including the RRC Reconfiguration message (“[0069] … The RRC message (e.g., the RRC reconfiguration message) may be associated with (e.g., include information for) SCG addition, SCG change or modification, and/or SCG release.”); and
performing the activation of the SCG (“[0135] …The WTRU may perform beam failure detection on the PSCell of a dormant SCG and may activate the dormant SCG (e.g., to perform beam failure recovery)”).
As to claim 3, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 12, Deenoo further discloses:
skipping to perform the random access procedure for the activation of the SCG, based on the RRC Reconfiguration message not including a reconfigurationWithSync (“[0074] “”… The secondary cell group configuration or reconfiguration may be synchronous (e.g., include a preamble transmission that may be configured using a configuration parameter such as reconfigurationWithSync). …”).
As to claim 16, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, Deenoo further discloses:
wherein the wireless device is in communication with at least one of a user equipment, a network, or an autonomous vehicle other than the wireless device (FIG. 2, WTRU, MN and SN).
Claims 10-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deenoo (US 20220394583 A1) in view of Kim (US 20240129991 A1), further in view of Babaei (US 20210204321 A1).
As to claim 10, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, and is silent but Babaei, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: wherein the Time Alignment Timer includes a Time Alignment Timer associated with a Primary Timing Advance Group (PTAG) (“[0273] In an example, when a a timeAlignmentTimer expires: if the timeAlignmentTimer is associated with the PTAG …”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Babaei above to the wireless system by Deenoo in view of Kim to yield a predictable result of synchronization of control messages according to MPEP 2143(D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine Deenoo in view of Kim with Babaei for the benefit of achieving synchronization of control messages ([0273] of Babaei).
As to claim 11, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 1, and is silent but Babaei, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses:
configuring, by the UE, a beam failure instance counter for the PSCell; and incrementing, by the UE, the beam failure instance counter based on detecting a beam failure instance for the PSCell, wherein it is determined that the random access procedure is not needed for activation of the SCG, based on the value of the beam failure instance counter for the PSCell being less than a maximum value (“[0219] In an example, the following RRC configuration parameters may be received in one or more IEs such as BeamFailureRecoveryConfig and the RadioLinkMonitoringConfig for the Beam Failure Detection and Recovery procedure: beamFailureInstanceMaxCount for the beam failure detection …”; note beamFailureInstanceMaxCount suggests the counter incrementing; random access procedure is not needed for activation if the counter is within the range specified by it, and the value of the counter cannot exceed the max value). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teachinh of Babaei above to the wireless system by Deenoo in view of Kim to yield a predictable result of handling beam failure according to MPEP 2143(D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine Deenoo in view of Kim with Babaei for the benefit of handling beam failure ([0219] of Babaei).
As to claim 14, Deenoo in view of Kim discloses claim 12, and is silent but Babaei, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses:
skipping to perform the random access procedure for the activation of the SCG, based on (1) beam failure detection (BFD) and radio link monitoring (RLM) being configured before reception of the RRC Reconfiguration message, and (2) determining that the random access procedure is not needed for activation of the SCG (“[0225] “… the IE RadioLinkMonitoringConfig may be used to configure radio link monitoring for detection of beam- and/or cell radio link failure. … If no RSs are provided in this list for the purpose of RLF detection, the wireless device may perform Cell-RLM based on the activated TCI-State of PDCCH. The network may ensure that the wireless device has a suitable set of reference signals for performing cell-RLM.”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teachinf of Babaei above to the wireless system by Deenoo in view of Kim to yield a result of facilitating failure recovery according to MPEP 2143(D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine Deenoo in view of Kim with Babaei for the benefit of facilitating failure recovery ([0255] of Babaei).
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 JIANYE WU whose telephone number is (571)270-1665. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8am-6pm.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/JIANYE WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462