DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/15/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
3. Claims 25-38 are pending wherein claims 25 and 32 are in independent form.
4. Claims 25 and 32 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments filed on 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below.
6. On page 9 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Accordingly, for the reasons given in Applicant’s previous response, Geng fails to disclose, teach or suggest “upon the wireless device transitioning from an idle mode to a connected mode in a currently connected cell, determining that a reconnect cell identifier is absent from the RLF report and conditionally including an identifier of the currently connected cell as the reconnect cell identifier,” as recited in independent claim 25. Therefore, Geng fails to disclose every element of claim 25.”
In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because:
Claim recites a reestablishment cell, a reconnect cell, and a currently connected cell. However, the claim does not specify any distinction among the three cells (reestablishment cell, reconnect cell, and currently connected cell). Therefore, these cells (reestablishment cell, reconnect cell, and currently connected cell) are considered as cells with which the UE attempted to establish a connection after the occurrence of a link failure. Therefore, cell B1 (Fig. 7)/cell C1 (Fig. 13) is considered as the reestablishment cell because UE attempted to establish a connection with cell B1/C1 after detecting a link failure. Similarly, cell C1 (Fig. 7)/D1 (Fig. 13) is considered as the currently connected cell because UE established connection with cell C1/D1 after detecting a link failure. Therefore, Geng teaches that upon the wireless device transitioning from an idle mode (disconnected/inactive in cell A1 due to RLF, Fig. 7; disconnected/inactive in cell B1 due to RLF, Fig. 13) to a connected mode in a currently connected cell (connected with the t cell C1, Fig. 7; connected with the cell D1, Fig. 13), determining that a reconnect cell identifier is absent from the RLF report (no other reconnection cell information is included in the RLF report) and conditionally including an identifier of the currently connected cell as the reconnect cell identifier (connectionCellId: C1, Fig. 7, Par 0333; connectionCellId: D1, Fig. 13, Par 0544).
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
8. Claims 30 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 30 and 37 recite that the RLF report does not include a reestablishment cell identifier. Claims 30 and 37 depend upon independent claims 25 and 32 and therefore, include all the limitations of the respective independent claim. However, the independent claims recite that the RLF report includes a reestablishment cell identifier (“a reestablishment cell identifier in a RLF report”). By determining the RLF report not including a reestablishment cell identifier, claims 30 and 37 include contradictory features (RLF report including a reestablishment cell identifier (claims 25 and 32), RLF report not including a reestablishment cell identifier (claims 30 and 37)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
10. Claims 25-29, 31-36, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Geng et al (US 20220053587 A1, hereinafter referred to as Geng).
Re claim 25, Geng teaches a method performed by a wireless device (terminal device, Fig. 7, Fig. 13), the method comprising:
(i) detecting a radio link failure (RLF) (RLF 701, Fig. 7; RLF 1303, Fig. 13) (Par 0311, Par 0526);
(ii) performing a reestablishment procedure (initiating handover to T-MN B1, 708, Fig. 7, initiating handover to T-MN C1 1308, Fig. 13) (Par 0320-0321, Par 0532-0533);
(iii) determining whether the reestablishment procedure was successful (another failure occurs while performing handover, 708, Fig. 7, 1308, Fig. 13) (Par 0320-0321, Par 0532-0533);
(iv) storing information (last failedCellId, last connection failure type) about the success or failure of the reestablishment procedure (RLF/HOF occurred while performing handover, 708, Fig. 7, 1308, Fig. 13) (Par 0320-0321, Par 0325-0331, Par 0532-0533, Par 0536-0542) and a reestablishment cell identifier in a RLF report (last failedCellId B1, Fig. 7, Par 0329; last failedCellId C1, Fig. 13, Par 0541);
(v) upon the wireless device transitioning from an idle mode (disconnected/inactive in cell A1 due to RLF, Fig. 7; disconnected/inactive in cell B1 due to RLF, Fig. 13) to a connected mode in a currently connected cell (connected with the t cell C1, Fig. 7; connected with the cell D1, Fig. 13), determining that a reconnect cell identifier is absent from the RLF report (no other reconnection cell information is included in the RLF report) and conditionally including an identifier of the currently connected cell as the reconnect cell identifier (connectionCellId: C1, Fig. 7, Par 0333; connectionCellId: D1, Fig. 13, Par 0544); and
(vi) transmitting the RLF report to a network node (transmitting RLF report to cell C1, 709, Fig. 7, Par 0322-0333; transmitting RLF report to cell D1, 1309, Fig. 13, Par 0534-0544).
Re claim 32, Geng teaches a wireless device performing the steps recited in claim 25 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 25. Geng further teaches that wireless device comprises processing circuitry (Processor) (Fig. 16, Par 0599-0605).
Re claims 26, 33, Geng teaches to store information about the success or failure of the establishment procedure in a RLF report comprises, upon determining the reestablishment procedure was unsuccessful (failure occurs while performing handover, 708, Fig. 7, 1308, Fig. 13) (Par 0320-0321, Par 0532-0533), storing the reestablishment cell identifier in the RLF report (last failedCellId B1, Fig. 7, Par 0329; last failedCellId C1, Fig. 13, Par 0541).
Re claims 27, 34, Geng teaches to store one or more of the following in the RLF report: an indication that the reestablishment procedure failed (last failedCellId, last connection failure type) (Par 0320-0321, Par 0325-0331, Par 0532-0533, Par 0536-0542); an indication that no suitable cell was found; and an indication that the wireless device received a reestablishment reject message.
Re claims 28, 35, Geng teaches that conditionally including an identifier of the currently connected cell as the reconnect cell identifier (connectionCellId: C1, Fig. 7, Par 0333; connectionCellId: D1, Fig. 13, Par 0544) comprises determining the RLF report includes a reestablishment cell identifier (last failedCellId B1, Fig. 7, Par 0329; last failedCellId C1, Fig. 13, Par 0541).
Re claims 29, 36, Geng teaches that storing information about the success or failure of the establishment procedure in a RLF report comprises storing the reestablishment cell identifier in the RLF report upon determining the reestablishment procedure was successful (Cell B is the reestablishment cell ID after reestablishing connection with target cell B, Fig. 3; Cell A is the reestablishment cell ID after reestablishing connection with the source cell A, Fig. 4) (Fig. 3-4, Par 0151-0169, Par 0179-0191).
Re claims 31, 38, Geng teaches to store storing one or more of the following in the RLF report: a global cell identifier of the reconnect cell (cell global identifier(CGI)); a physical cell identifier of the reconnect cell (physical cell identifier (PCI)); radio frequency information for the reconnect cell (frequency information); a tracking area code of the reconnect cell; and a public land mobile network identifier of the reconnect cell (Par 0132-0138, Par 0151-0169, Par 0179-0191).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claims 30 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng as applied to claims 29 and 36 above and further in view of 3GPP (R3-131285, Impact on MRO from RRC re-establishment, hereinafter referred to as 3GPP).
Re claims 30, 37, Geng does not explicitly disclose to determine the RLF report does not include a reestablishment cell identifier.
3GPP teaches to determine the RLF report does not include a reestablishment cell identifier (not including reestablishment cell identifier for unsuccessful reestablishment due to radio problems such as no suitable cell can be selected, the selected cell is no longer suitable) (Section 4.1-UE based solution).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Geng by including the step to determine the RLF report does not include a reestablishment cell identifier, as taught by 3GPP for the purpose of providing additional information to the network node to improve radio link failure (RLF) reporting, as taught by 3GPP (Section 4.1-UE based solution).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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.
/HARUN CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2473