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 .
The present application claims priority to US Prov. Pat. App. 63/284,472 filed November 30, 2021.
Status of the Claims
This paper is responsive to an RCE filed November 16, 2025, in which:
Claims 1, 3-12 and 14, 16-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17 and 20 have been amended.
Claims 2, 13 and 15 have been cancelled.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17 and 20. The amendments have support and have been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 8 and 14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 10, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20230126142 to Ozcan Ozturk and Arvind Vardarajan Santhanam based on provisional filing 63262855 October, 21, 2021 (hereinafter Ozturk) in view of US Pat. Pub. 20240414607 to Halit Murat Gursu, (hereinafter Gursu) (claiming priority to PCT application EP2021/083322 filed November 29, 2021), further in view of in view of "Quick Handover in LTE for High-Speed Metro Rails and Highways using PN Sequence Detection and Forward Handover" by Md Atiqul Haque et al. Islamic University of Technology, Gazipur Bangladesh, March 2021 provided in Applicant's IDS, (hereinafter Haque).
Regarding claim 1, Ozturk in view of Gursu and further in view of Haque teaches A user equipment (UE) (Ozturk Fig. 1 UE 101a) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive configuration information for a conditional handover (CHO); (Ozturk para. [0037] and para. [0176] “wireless transceivers”)
and
a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, (Ozturk Fig. 9 circuitry and para. [0187] “processor circuitry” ) the processor configured to generate channel state information (CSI) reports indicating a channel state associated with at least one of a candidate cell or a serving cell, (Ozturk, para. [0058] teaches measurement reports shown in Fig. 3 reports 324. Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the reports generated by the UE “may indicate, for example, an RSRP parameter, an RSRQ parameter, an RSSI parameter, or a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) parameter.” Ozturk para. [0093] teaches a CSI report specific for handovers.)
wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit the CSI reports, (Ozturk para. [0059] teaches “transmit a measurement report to the source gNB 305” as illustrated in Fig. 3.),
and wherein the processor is further configured to:
Ozturk does NOT teach “increment a value of a counter for the CHO each time one of the CSI reports indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state associated with the serving cell” (Ozturk para. [0060] teaches that a handover command includes a condition “e.g., threshold for a handover to a particular candidate gNB” but does NOT teach incrementing a value of a counter for CHO)
In the same field of endeavor, Gursu teaches increment a value of a counter for the CHO each time one of the CSI reports indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state associated with the serving cell. (Gursu teaches in paras. [0193]-[0196] that a counter is “incremented each time the leaving condition” is met, and that the sending of the measurement report happens when the leaving condition of the measurement event is met a predetermined number of times. Therefore, Gursu teaches monitoring for CHO-related measurement conditions, and takes action based on the counter. The “leaving condition” in Gursu is associated with whether a candidate cell is better than a serving cell.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to effective date of the invention to have combined Gursu with Ozturk to teach increment a value of a counter for the CHO. The modification uses prior art elements according to their established functions to produce a predictable result that is equivalent to the claimed limitations. This method of improving was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art, who would have been motivated to perform this modification in order to enable a terminal to save energy by transmitting fewer measurement reports as taught in Gursu para. [0253].
and
Ozturk does NOT teach execute the CHO based on a determination that the value of the counter reaches a number of reporting times N for the CHO.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches execute the CHO based on a determination that the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N for the CHO. (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover. Examiner notes that Haque increments the counter after each measurement report is transmitted, which is an adjustment to a counter based on the transmission of the report.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach counting the CSI reports taught in Ozturk to determine when to do an actual handover based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with the counting of Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count.
Regarding claim 4, Ozturk does NOT teach The UE of Claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to identify a boundary value M for determining the number of reporting times N, and the processor is further configured to execute the CHO when the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N out of the boundary value M.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches identify a boundary value M for determining the number of reporting times N, the processor is further configured to execute the CHO when the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N out of the boundary value M. (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover. Therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims if a boundary value of zero occurs, the number of reports for a quick handover can be n=1.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach counting the CSI reports taught in Ozturk to determine when to do an actual handover based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with the counting of Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count as taught on Haque page 1.
Regarding claim 6, Ozturk teaches The UE of Claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to identify the channel state based on at least one of a channel information or layer 1 (L1) measured reference signal received power (RSRP). (Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the measurement report may indicate an RSRP parameter when determining an event trigger or handover condition.)
Regarding claim 7, Ozturk does NOT teach The UE of Claim 1, wherein the transceiver is further configured to:
when a first of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than the channel state associated with the serving cell, transmit the first CSI report to the serving cell or the candidate cell; and
when a second of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, transmit the second CSI report only to the serving cell.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches when a first of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than the channel state associated with the serving cell, transmit the first CSI report to the serving cell or the candidate cell; (Haque teaches on pages 11-12, “the UE transmits measurement reports to the eNodeB frequently, depending on whether it is event triggered measurement reporting or periodic measurement reporting.”) and
when the second of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, transmit the second CSI report only to the serving cell. (Haque teaches on pages 11-12 that when the measurement reports (more than one) show that a neighbor cell is providing a stronger signal than the serving cell by a sufficient amount, a handover command is transmitted to the UE. Therefore when the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, the CSI report only goes to the eNodeB.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach transmitting measurement reports as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with transmitting reports in Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers as taught on page 1 of Haque.
Regarding claim 8 Ozturk in view of Haque and Gursu teach A base station (BS) in a wireless communication system, (Ozturk, Fig. 1, 110a Base Station) the BS comprising:
a transceiver configured to: (Ozturk Fig. 2, transmit processor 220 and modems 232, para. [0046])
transmit configuration information for a conditional handover (CHO), (Ozturk, para. [0060] “transmit an RRC reconfiguration... The RRC reconfiguration message may include a handover command instructing the UE 120 to execute the conditional handover”) and
receive channel state information (CSI) reports indicating a channel state associated with at least one of a candidate cell or a serving cell; (Ozturk, para. [0058] teaches measurement reports are sent to gNB 305 in step 324, shown in Fig. 3. Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the reports generated by the UE for source or neighbor cells that a trigger condition is met based on report that “may indicate, for example, an RSRP parameter, an RSRQ parameter, an RSSI parameter, or a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) parameter.” Ozturk para. [0093] teaches a CSI report specific for handovers.)
and
a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to execute the CHO. (Ozturk para. [0060] teaches that a handover command includes a condition “(e.g., threshold) for a handover to a particular candidate gNB”)
Ozturk does NOT teach when a value of a counter reaches a number of reporting times N for the CHO.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches the CSI report that is used to determine whether a value of a counter reaches a number of reporting times N for the CHO. (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach counting the CSI reports taught in Ozturk to determine when to do an actual handover based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with the counting of Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count.
Ozturk does NOT teach wherein the value of the counter is incremented each time one of the CSI report indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state with the serving cell.
In the same field of endeavor, Gursu teaches wherein the value of the counter is incremented each time one of the CSI report indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state with the serving cell. (Gursu teaches in paras. [0193]-[0196] that a counter is “incremented each time the leaving condition” is met, and that the sending of the measurement report happens when the leaving condition of the measurement event is met a predetermined number of times. Therefore, Gursu teaches monitoring for CHO-related measurement conditions, and takes action based on the counter. The “leaving condition” in Gursu is associated with whether a candidate cell is better than a serving cell.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to effective date of the invention to have combined Gursu with Ozturk to teach increment a value of a counter for the CHO. The modification uses prior art elements according to their established functions to produce a predictable result that is equivalent to the claimed limitations. This method of improving was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art, who would have been motivated to perform this modification in order to enable a terminal to save energy by transmitting fewer measurement reports as taught in Gursu para. [0253].
Regarding claim 10, Ozturk teaches The BS of Claim 8, wherein the CSI report indicates a better channel state and signal quality associated with the serving cell. (Ozturk, para. [0058] teaches measurement reports are sent to gNB 305 in step 324, shown in Fig. 3. Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the reports generated by the UE for source or neighbor cells that a trigger condition is met based on report that “may indicate, for example, an RSRP parameter, an RSRQ parameter, an RSSI parameter, or a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) parameter.” Ozturk para. [0093] teaches a CSI report specific for handovers.)
Regarding claim 11, Ozturk teaches The BS of Claim 8, wherein the channel state is determined based on at least one of a channel information or layer 1 (L1) measured reference signal received power (RSRP). (Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the measurement report may indicate an RSRP parameter when determining an event trigger or handover condition.)
Regarding claim 12, Ozturk does NOT teach The BS of Claim 8, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the CHO when the CSI report is consecutively received the number of reporting times N.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches the processor is further configured to execute the CHO when the CSI report is consecutively received the number of reporting times N. (Haque page 38 teaches “that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports” wherein each measurement report after a first report increases n from zero to one. Thus, a zero results in a handover after a first report.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach executing the CHO based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with executing the CHO based on a count in Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count as taught on page 1 of Haque.
Regarding claim 14 Ozturk in view of Gursu and Haque teaches A method of a user equipment (UE) (Ozturk Fig. 1 UE 101a) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving configuration information for a conditional handover (CHO); (Ozturk, para. [0060] “transmit an RRC reconfiguration... The RRC reconfiguration message may include a handover command instructing the UE 120 to execute the conditional handover”)
generating channel state information (CSI) reports indicating a channel state associated with at least one of a candidate cell or a serving cell; (Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the reports generated by the UE for source or neighbor cells that a trigger condition is met based on report that “may indicate, for example, an RSRP parameter, an RSRQ parameter, an RSSI parameter, or a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) parameter.” Ozturk para. [0093] teaches a CSI report specific for handovers.)
transmitting the CSI reports; (Ozturk, para. [0058] teaches measurement reports are sent to gNB 305 in step 324, shown in Fig. 3)
incrementing a value of a counter for the CHO each time one of the CSI reports indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state associated with the serving cell; (Ozturk para. [0060] teaches that a handover command includes a condition “(e.g., threshold for a handover to a particular candidate gNB” but does NOT teach incrementing a value of a counter for CHO.)
In the same field of endeavor, Gursu teaches incrementing a value of a counter for the CHO each time one of the CSI reports indicates that a channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than a channel state associated with the serving cell. (Gursu teaches in paras. [0193]-[0196] that a counter is “incremented each time the leaving condition” is met, and that the sending of the measurement report happens when the leaving condition of the measurement event is met a predetermined number of times. Therefore, Gursu teaches monitoring for CHO-related measurement conditions, and takes action based on the counter. The “leaving condition” in Gursu is associated with whether a candidate cell is better than a serving cell.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to effective date of the invention to have combined Gursu with Ozturk to teach increment a value of a counter for the CHO. The modification uses prior art elements according to their established functions to produce a predictable result that is equivalent to the claimed limitations. This method of improving was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art, who would have been motivated to perform this modification in order to enable a terminal to save energy by transmitting fewer measurement reports as taught in Gursu para. [0253].
Ozturk does NOT teach executing the CHO based on a determination that the value of the counter reaches a number of reporting times N for the CHO.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches executing the CHO based on a determination that the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N for the CHO, (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach counting the CSI reports taught in Ozturk to determine when to do an actual handover based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with the counting of Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count as taught on Haque page 1.
Regarding claim 17, Ozturk does NOT teach The method of Claim 14, further comprising:
identifying a boundary value M for determining the number of reporting times N, wherein the boundary value M is greater than the number of reporting times N; and executing the CHO when the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N out of the boundary value M.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches identifying a boundary value M for determining the number of reporting times N, wherein the boundary value M is greater than the number of reporting times N; (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover.)
and
executing the CHO when the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N out of the boundary value M (Haque teaches on page 38, “assuming that the handover is triggered after n number of measurement reports at a reporting interval of tinterval, the actual handover is triggered.....” and therefore, when a quick handover is required, an n of zero will result in a faster conditional handover. Therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims if a boundary value of zero occurs, the number of reports for a quick handover can be n=1.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach counting the CSI reports taught in Ozturk to determine when to do an actual handover based on a count n as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with the counting of Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers with a lower n count as taught on Haque page 1.
Regarding claim 19, Ozturk teaches The method of Claim 14, further comprising identifying the channel state based on at least one of a channel information or layer 1 (L1) measured reference signal received power (RSRP). (Ozturk para. [0059] teaches that the measurement report may indicate an RSRP parameter when determining an event trigger or handover condition.)
Regarding claim 20, Ozturk does NOT teach The method of Claim 14, wherein transmitting the CSI report further comprises:
when a first of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than the channel state associated with the serving cell, transmitting the first CSI report to the serving cell or the candidate cell; and
when a second of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, transmitting the second CSI report only to the serving cell.
In the analogous art of 3GPP LTE wireless communications, Haque teaches when a first of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the candidate cell is better than the channel state associated with the serving cell, transmitting the first CSI report to the serving cell or the candidate cell; (Haque pages 11-12 teaches “the UE transmits measurement reports to the eNodeB frequently, depending on whether it is event triggered measurement reporting or periodic measurement reporting.”
and
when a second of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, transmitting the second CSI report only to the serving cell. (Haque pages 11-12 teach that when the measurement reports show that a neighbor cell is providing a stronger signal than the serving cell by a sufficient amount, a handover command is transmitted to the UE. Therefore when the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, a CSI report only goes to the eNodeB.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Ozturk with Haque to teach transmitting measurement reports as taught in Haque. Each of Ozturk and Haque are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the CSI reporting of Ozturk with transmitting reports in Haque in order to enable a UE to make a handover decision not based on a particular measurement report, and enable faster handovers as taught on page 1 of Hague.
Claims 3, 5, 9, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozturk in view of Gursu, and in view of Haque, and further in view of “Open Issues for Conditional Handover”, CMCC, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #105 R2-10901958, February 25 – March 1, 2019 provided in Applicant’s IDS (hereinafter CMCC).
Regarding claim 3, Ozturk does NOT teach The UE of Claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to reset the value of the counter when one of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, before the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N.
In the analogous art of 3GPP Standards Meetings for Conditional Handover, CMCC teaches: reset the value of the counter when one of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with candidate cell, before the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N. (CMCC teaches on page 3 that “UE can be configured with several report events and send the measurement report up to reportAmount times with interval of reportinterval, when the configured events are fulfilled.” ... “it is reasonable to allow the source eNB to configure multiple conditions for the UE, and there are several method to update the configuration” ... “If no timer, invalid indication, nor new configuration is received, the original CHO is still considered valid” Therefore, when the channel state of the serving cell is better, per the configuration, an invalid indication would result in the CHO configuration being invalid, and reporting would reset.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined CMCC with Ozturk to teach resetting a counter when channel state of a serving cell is better for conditional handovers because both Ozturk and CMCC are in the field of wireless communications and specifically conditional handovers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine CMCC with Ozturk to benefit from the robustness improvements from the 3GPP agreements to RAN 2 as taught on page 1 of CMCC.
Regarding claim 5, Ozturk teaches The UE of Claim 4, wherein the transceiver is further configured to receive, from a serving base station (BS) or a target BS, [[the configuration information including at least one of the number of reporting times N]] or the boundary value M via a UE dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message. (Ozturk para. [0060] teaches that the configuration information with threshold is sent via an RRC message)
Ozturk does NOT teach the configuration information including at least one of the number of reporting times N.
However in the analogous art of 3GPP Standards Meetings for Conditional Handover CMCC teaches the configuration information including at least one of the number of reporting times N. (CMCC teaches on page 3 “UE can be configured with several report events and send the measurement report up to reportAmount times.”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined CMCC with Ozturk to teach configured the UE to send the number of reporting times N because both Ozturk and CMCC are in the field of wireless communications and specifically conditional handovers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine CMCC with Ozturk to benefit from the robustness improvements from the 3GPP agreements to RAN 2 as taught on page 1 of CMCC.
Regarding claim 9, Ozturk teaches The BS of Claim 8, wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit, to the UE, the configuration information including [[at least one of the number of reporting times N]] or a boundary value M via a UE dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message. (Ozturk para. [0060] teaches that the configuration information with threshold is sent via an RRC message)
Ozturk does NOT teach including at least one of the number of reporting times N.)
However in the analogous art of 3GPP Standards Meetings for Conditional Handover CMCC teaches including at least one of the number of reporting times N. CMCC teaches on page 3 “UE can be configured with several report events and send the measurement report up to reportAmount times.”
One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined CMCC with Ozturk to teach configured the UE to send the number of reporting times N because both Ozturk and CMCC are in the field of wireless communications and specifically conditional handovers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine CMCC with Ozturk to benefit from the robustness improvements from the 3GPP agreements to RAN 2 as taught on page 1 of CMCC.
Regarding claim 16, Ozturk does NOT teach The method of Claim 14, further comprising resetting the value of the counter when one of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with the candidate cell, before the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N.
In the analogous art of 3GPP Standards Meetings for Conditional Handover, CMCC teaches: resetting the value of the counter when one of the CSI reports indicates that the channel state associated with the serving cell is better than the channel state associated with candidate cell, before the value of the counter reaches the number of reporting times N. (CMCC teaches on page 3 that “UE can be configured with several report events and send the measurement report up to reportAmount times with interval of reportinterval, when the configured events are fulfilled.” ... “it is reasonable to allow the source eNB to configure multiple conditions for the UE, and there are several method to update the configuration” ... “If no timer, invalid indication, nor new configuration is received, the original CHO is still considered valid” Therefore, when the channel state of the serving cell is better, per the configuration, an invalid indication would result in the CHO configuration being invalid, and reporting would reset.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined CMCC with Ozturk to teach resetting a counter when channel state of a serving cell is better for conditional handovers because both Ozturk and CMCC are in the field of wireless communications and specifically conditional handovers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine CMCC with Ozturk to benefit from the robustness improvements from the 3GPP agreements to RAN 2 as taught on page 1 of CMCC.
Regarding claim 18, Ozturk does NOT teach The method of Claim 17, further comprising receiving, from a serving base station (BS) or a target BS, the configuration information including at least one of the number of reporting times N or the boundary value M via a UE dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP Standards Meetings for Conditional Handover CMCC teaches including at least one of the number of reporting times N. CMCC teaches on page 3 that the configuration received from a serving base station includes “UE can be configured with several report events and send the measurement report up to reportAmount times.”
One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined CMCC with Ozturk to teach configured the UE to send the number of reporting times N because both Ozturk and CMCC are in the field of wireless communications and specifically conditional handovers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine CMCC with Ozturk to benefit from the robustness improvements from the 3GPP agreements to RAN 2 as taught on page 1 of CMCC.
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 MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1068. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at 571-570-7191. 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.
/MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights