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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 16, 18-21, 23-26, 28-31, 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 104 as being anticipated by Hu WO 2022027543 in view of Deenoo US 20220394583
16. A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a first base station associated with a master cell group (MCG), a first radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message including configuration information for configuring a secondary cell group (SCG) associated with a second base station (Hu: (third aspect) - the first RRC message includes a second RRC message, and the activated TCI state information is included in the second RRC message; The second RRC message is an RRC message from the secondary node);
receiving, from the first base station, a second RRC message for deactivating the SCG (Hu: (third aspect) - when the SCG is in a deactivated state, the terminal device receives first information from the master node, … the first information is a first radio resource control RRC message, the first RRC message includes a second RRC message);
based on the second RRC message for deactivating the SCG, performing an SCG deactivation (Hu: fig. 8-9, step s201 - when the SCG of the terminal device is in a deactivated state, the secondary node can send the second RRC message to the master node, and the master node sends the first RRC message including the second RRC message to the terminal device);
detecting a beam failure on a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG while the SCG is deactivated (Hu: fig. 8-9, step s201, (fifth aspect) - a terminal device fails to detect a beam beam of a first cell in a secondary cell group SCG; wherein the SCG is in a deactivated state; the first cell is the SCG of the PSCell in the SCG); and
transmitting, to the first base station, a [[control]] message for informing the detection of the beam failure of the SCG (Hu: fig. 10, step s301 -When the SCG is in a deactivated state, the UE sends fourth indication information to the secondary node through the primary node).
However, He merely discloses the term “a control message”
Deenoo further teaches the control message (Deenoo: [0003, 0130-0132] The WTRU may transmit a beam failure indication message to the MN)
receiving, from a first base station associated with a master cell group (MCG), a first radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message including configuration information for configuring a secondary cell group (SCG) associated with a second base station (Deenoo: [0075] A WTRU may be configured with (e.g., the WTRU may receive) one or more multi-connectivity conditional reconfigurations, e.g., where at least one reconfiguration may be associated with an MCG and at least one reconfiguration may be associated with an SCG…);
receiving, from the first base station, a second RRC message for deactivating the SCG (Deenoo: [0130] The WTRU may receive an SCG suspension message (e.g., an RRC message) from the MN);
based on the second RRC message for deactivating the SCG, performing an SCG deactivation (Deenoo: fig. 3-4, 6 - RRCReconfig);
detecting a beam failure on a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG while the SCG is deactivated (Deenoo: [0099, 0130-0132] The WTRU may continue to perform beam measurements on one or more SCG SCells while the SCG is suspended. A beam failure may be detected (e.g., at a subsequent time) at the WTRU on a cell associated with the SCG….A trigger condition may be associated with a beam failure (e.g. for the PSCell of a SCG). A WTRU may be configured to apply an SCG configuration and/or to activate a dormant SCG (e.g. as described herein) if a beam failure is detected on the PSCell); and
transmitting, to the first base station, a control message for informing the detection of the beam failure of the SCG (Deenoo: [0003, 0130-0132] The WTRU may transmit a beam failure indication message to the MN).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Hu’s invention in order to determine each other's conditions and/or states via the messaging, as taught by Deenoo.
18. The method of claim 16, further comprising: based on the receiving of the second RRC message for deactivating the SCG, transmitting, to the first base station, a confirmation message confirming that the second RRC message is received (Deenoo: [0003-0004]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Hu’s invention in order to determine each other's conditions and/or states via the messaging, as taught by Deenoo.
19. The method of claim 16, wherein the configuration information includes counter information for detecting the beam failure, and wherein the beam failure is detected, in case that a counter for beam failure instance indication is equal to or larger than the counter information (Deenoo: [0114, 0116, 0135]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Hu’s invention in order to determine each other's conditions and/or states via the messaging, as taught by Deenoo.
20. The method of claim 16, wherein the configuration information includes at least one first information associated with a timing advance (TA) or second information on beam failure recovery (Deenoo: [0113, 0116, 0120]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Hu’s invention in order to determine each other's conditions and/or states via the messaging, as taught by Deenoo.
Regarding claims 21, 23-26, 28-31, 33-35, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 16, 18-20, where the difference used is a “UE/BS” and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 16, 18-21, 23-26, 28-31, 33-35 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Remark:
The examiner stresses that the claims are too broad and require detail or specialization of the steps as recited in the claims. Alone and as claimed, the limitations are too open.
Examiner has cited particular portions of the references as applied to each claim limitation for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Regarding all other arguments presented by applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the Examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
In addition, an interview could expedite the prosecution.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sulaiman Nooristany whose telephone number is 571-270-1929. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday: 8:30am to 5:00pm (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SULAIMAN NOORISTANY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415