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
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.
Claim(s) 35-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Chang et al. US 2023/0262565 A1
Claims 35, 52 and 53:
Chang discloses a method performed by a wireless device (Fig. 13, UE processor and memory), the method comprising: declaring a radio link failure in a source cell of a source network node, during a dual active protocol stack, DAPS, handover from the source cell of the source network node to a target cell of a target network node (See paras 50-51 and 57, RLF during DAPS handover); declaring a DAPS handover failure (See paras 51, 57 and 67, RLF during DAPS handover); storing information associated with the DAPS handover (See paras 51, 57 and 64, stores DAPS handover RLF information); storing information associated with the radio link failure (See paras 51, 57 and 64, stores DAPS handover RLF information); and transmitting the information associated with the DAPS handover and the information associated with the radio link failure in a radio link failure report to an access node (See para 57, “the UE to report the radio link failure report stored thereby. The UE will report the stored radio link failure report (the rlf-Report information element in the UEInformationResponse message) to the network side… The radio link failure report may include:… an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”. Also see para 54, timer for DAPS handover), wherein the information comprises a time elapsed between reception of DAPS handover command and the radio link failure in the source cell (See para 57, “an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”).
Claim 36:
Chang discloses transmitting, to the access node, an indication of the availability of the information; and receiving a request to transmit the information, wherein the information is transmitted in response to the request (See para 57, “the UE can inform the network side by using an RRC message that there is an available radio link failure report thereon (for example, indicated by an rlf-InfoAvailable information element”).
Claim 37:
Chang discloses that the radio link failure is associated with a failed connection between the wireless device and the source cell of the source network node (See para 67, source BS RLF).
Claim 38:
Chang discloses that the access node comprises a network node with which the wireless device establishes a connection after the wireless device declares the radio link failure with the source network node (See paras 80-81, “the field may also be used to indicate that the present link failure is a source base station RLF that occurs during the DAPS handover…. in a DAPS handover procedure in which a connection to the target base station has been successfully established but a source base station link release instruction has not been received. That is, the field is for indicating whether the link failure occurs during running of T304”).
Claim 39:
Chang discloses prior to transmitting the information, establishing a connection with the access node (See para 71 and 80-81, RLF includes: “the field may also be used to indicate that the present link failure is a source base station RLF that occurs during the DAPS handover…. in a DAPS handover procedure in which a connection to the target base station has been successfully established but a source base station link release instruction has not been received. That is, the field is for indicating whether the link failure occurs during running of T304”).
Claim 40:
Chang discloses receiving a handover command from the source network node and initiating the dual active protocol stack handover in response to the handover command (See para 64, “Upon receiving the handover command including the DAPS configuration, the UE performs the DAPS handover procedure, and the DAPS handover succeeds”).
Claims 41 and 49:
Chang discloses that the information comprises a time between declaring a handover failure and declaring the radio link failure (See para 57, “an elapsed time between the link failure and radio link failure reporting (timeSinceFailure information element)”).
Claims 42 and 50:
Chang discloses that the information comprises at least one of: radio measurements of the source cell of the dual active protocol stack handover (See para 57, “measurement results of a source cell); radio measurements of a target cell of the dual active protocol stack handover (See para 57, “measurement results of a source cell and neighbor cell(s)”. Also, see para 151, measurement of cells);radio measurements of at least one neighboring cell (See para 57, “measurement results of a source cell and neighbor cell(s)”); a time between sending a RRCReconfigurationComplete message to the target node and declaring the RLF (See para 57, “an elapsed time between the link failure and radio link failure reporting (timeSinceFailure information element)” and further in paras 88-89, “an RRC message including source base station failure information (RLF information). [0089] The RRC message may be an RRC reconfiguration complete message”); and a status of a timer when a HO command was received from the source network node (See para 57, “an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”).
Claims 43 and 51:
Chang discloses that the information comprises a time elapsed between reception of DAPS handover command and radio link failure in the source cell (See para 57, “an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”).
Claims 44, 54 and 55:
Chang discloses a method performed by a network node (See fig. 1, Base station) comprising: receiving, in a radio link failure report from a wireless device, information associated with a dual active protocol stack, DAPS, handover and information associated with a radio link failure (See para 57, “the UE to report the radio link failure report stored thereby. The UE will report the stored radio link failure report (the rlf-Report information element in the UEInformationResponse message) to the network side… The radio link failure report may include… an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”. Also see para 54, timer for DAPS handover), wherein the radio link failure is in a source cell of a source network node (See para 67, source BS RLF), wherein the dual active protocol stack, handover is from the source cell of the source network node to a target cell of a target network node (See paras 65-67, DAPS handover from source to target), wherein the information comprises a time elapsed between reception of DAPS handover command and the radio link failure in the source cell (See para 57, “an elapsed time between reception of a last handover command to perform a handover procedure and the link failure (referred to as a timeConnFailure information element)”).
Claim 45:
Chang discloses prior to receiving the information, receiving an indication of the availability of the information; and transmitting, to the wireless device, a request for the information (See para 57, “the UE can inform the network side by using an RRC message that there is an available radio link failure report thereon (for example, indicated by an rlf-InfoAvailable information element”).
Claim 46:
Chang discloses that the network node establishes a connection with the wireless device after the wireless device declares the radio link failure with the source cell of the source network node (See paras 80-81, “the field may also be used to indicate that the present link failure is a source base station RLF that occurs during the DAPS handover…. in a DAPS handover procedure in which a connection to the target base station has been successfully established but a source base station link release instruction has not been received. That is, the field is for indicating whether the link failure occurs during running of T304”).
Claim 47:
Chang discloses that the information indicates that the dual active protocol stack handover with the target cell of the target network node has failed (See para 54, “it is considered that a target base station MCG RLF has been detected” and para 56, HOF. Also see para 62, “transmits an RRC message (e.g., FailureInformation) including a DAPS failure indication to the source base station”).
Claim 48:
Chang discloses tuning or optimizing at least one handover parameter based on the information (See para 57, “The radio link failure report obtained by the network side is used for network optimization, such as network coverage and mobility robustness optimization”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to claim 1 and its corresponding independent claims, on pages 2-3 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the claim recites that the RLF is associated with the source cell and not related to the running of a T304 timer.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Chang discloses many other reasons other than expiration of the timer, see para 54: The UE considers that an RLF has occurred when one of the following conditions occurs: a timer T310 used for RLF monitoring expires, a timer T312 used for fast RLF monitoring expires, an indication of a random-access problem is received from a MAC layer, and an indication used to indicate that the maximum number of retransmissions has been reached is received from an RLC entity". Since the UE hasn't completely handedover to the target cell, all the aforementioned reasons for radio link failure including the expiration of the timer are related to the source cell. Also see para 67: “when a source base station RLF in a DAPS handover procedure is detected, the UE generates and stores link failure information related to the source base station RLF”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yan US 20230292214 A1 discloses under the condition that a scene type of the cell change is a DAPS handover, the recording mobility information includes executing any one of following steps: recording that the DAPS handover to the target cell fails, and radio resource connection fallback to the source cell succeeds; recording that the DAPS handover to the target cell fails, the UE occurs a radio link failure (RLF) in the source cell, and execution of radio resource connection reestablishment succeeds/fails; recording that the DAPS handover to the target cell fails, the UE occurs an RLF in the source cell, and the UE selects a suitable cell and a conditional handover (CHO) for establishing communication with the suitable cell succeeds.
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 HASHIM S BHATTI whose telephone number is (571)270-7748. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at 571-270-3770. 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.
HASHIM S. BHATTI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2472
/HASHIM S BHATTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights