DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/03/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 10-13, and 16 have been amended; Claim(s) 9 and 18 have been canceled; Claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 1-8 and 10-17 are subject to examination.
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
Applicant's arguments filed 04/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Arguments:
The applicant argues in substance that DaSilva fails to disclose the features of the amended claim 1. While the applicant concedes that DaSilva discloses performing conditional reconfiguration independently based on a first variable associated with the MN and a second variable associated with the SN, DASILVE does not relate to conditional reconfiguration based on independently managed variables.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim defines a first variable as: “first variable related with the first conditional reconfiguration information related with the MCG” that is used to determine “performing a conditional reconfiguration procedure”. The claim defines a second variable as: “second variable related with the second conditional reconfiguration information related with the SCG” that is used to determine “performing the conditional reconfiguration procedure”,. DASILVA pg 6 Table discloses “two independent measConfigs” that the UE can receive. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, independent measConfigs means independently managed measConfigs. The examiner recommends the applicant further define in the limitations of the claims what it means to have “independently managed variables” to differentiate from DASILVA’s independent variables which are configured for independent cases. The examiner further recommends the applicant to further define: first variable and second variable for clarity.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to “releasing all entries within the first variable and the second variable according to a successful completion of the conditional reconfiguration procedure based on the second variable” 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.
Regarding all other arguments presented by the 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 response above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-17 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 1 and 10 recites the limitation “or an RRC reconfiguration message received via an SRB3”. It is unclear whether this “an RRC reconfiguration message” is the same or different from the preceding “a RRC reconfiguration message received via a signaling radio bearer 1”. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret “an RRC reconfiguration message received via an SRB3” as any RRC reconfiguration message which is received via SRB3. Claims 2-8 and 13-17 are rejected as dependent on claims 1 and 10 respectively.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DA SILVA et al. (US 20230413124 A1) (see 892 06/18/2025) in view of CATT, Remaining issues on CPAC from UE perspective, R2-2203101, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #117-e, Online, February 14, 2022 (see IDS 07/06/2023), hereby referred to as CATT.
Claim 1:
DASILVA teaches A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving first conditional reconfiguration information related with a master cell group (MCG) via a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message information received via a signaling radio bearer 1 (SRB1) (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – a measConfig, associated with SCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB3, or…within a RRCReconfiguraiton message embedded in a RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1.”) wherein first conditional reconfiguration information related with MCG is a measConfig associated with MCG); receiving second conditional reconfiguration information related with a secondary cell group (SCG) via either a first RRC reconfiguration message embedded in a second RRC reconfiguration message received via the SRB 1 or an RRC reconfiguration message received via an SRB3 (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – a measConfig, associated with SCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB3, or…within a RRCReconfiguraiton message embedded in a RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1. In this case, the UE maintains two independent VarMeasConfig and VarMeasReportList, one associated with each measConfig and independently performs all the prcedures…”) wherein second conditional reconfiguration information related with SCG is a measConfig associated with SCG); performing a conditional reconfiguration procedure based on first variable related with the first conditional reconfiguration information related with the MCG (DASILVA: para 96 (“the UE checks both MN/MCG measConfig and SN/SCG measConfig to determine which one contains the CPC-related MeasConfig…”) and Pg 9 Table (“for each measID included in the measIDList within VarMeasConfig…indicated in the condExecutionCondassociated to condReconfigID…if the entry condition(s) applicable…if the leaving condition(s) applicable…if event(s)…are fulfilled…imitate the conditional reconfiguration execution…”) wherein conditional reconfiguration procedure is based on the first variable having CPC-related MeasConfig or not having CPC-related MeasConfig); performing the conditional reconfiguration procedure based on second variable related with the second conditional reconfiguration information related with the SCG (DASILVA: para 96 (“the UE checks both MN/MCG measConfig and SN/SCG measConfig to determine which one contains the CPC-related MeasConfig…”) and Pg 9 Table (“for each measID included in the measIDList within VarMeasConfig…indicated in the condExecutionCondassociated to condReconfigID…if the entry condition(s) applicable…if the leaving condition(s) applicable…if event(s)…are fulfilled…imitate the conditional reconfiguration execution…”) wherein conditional reconfiguration procedure is based on the second variable having CPC-related MeasConfig or not having CPC-related MeasConfig).
However, DASILVA does not explicitly disclose releasing all entries within the first variable and the second variable according to a successful completion of the conditional reconfiguration procedure based on the second variable.
CATT, in the same field of endeavor, teaches releasing all entries within the first variable and the second variable according to a successful completion of the conditional reconfiguration procedure based on the second variable (CATT: Section 5 FIG. 1 wherein the conditional reconfiguration procedure is based on SCG variables and pg 4 (“the CPAC related measIDs, measObjects as well as the reportConfig…will be removed by UE automatically upon CPAC execution…”), pg 4 (“1>if…successfully completes…remove all the entries within VARConditionalReconfig…”)wherein successful competition causes release of entries in the Var Conditional Reconfig related to each variable/measIDs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DASILVA with CATT, the combination hereby referred to as DASILVA-CATT, for the benefit of synchronization (CATT: Section 5).
Claim 2:
DASILVA-CATT teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the conditional reconfiguration information includes at least one information for adding or modifying conditional configuration, and wherein information for adding or modifying conditional reconfiguration includes a conditional reconfiguration identification (ID), a condition information related with measurement ID and a conditional RRC reconfiguration (DASILVA: para 101 (“…RRCReconfiguration message comprises at least one conditional reconfiguration for the CPC…another RRC Reconfiguration message…in MN format…at least one execution condition…a conditional reconfiguration identity associated with the CPC…”), para 110 (“The ConditionalReconfiguration IE…is used to add/modify and release the configuration of conditional configuration”) and pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – a measConfig, associated with SCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB3…”)).
Claim 8:
DASILVA-CATT teaches the method of claim 1, wherein first measurement ID related with a condition information in the first variable refers to a measurement ID in an MCG measurement configuration (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – ameasConfig, associated with SCG…”), para 68 (“…the SCG measConfig with the CP-related measConfig (containing the measID(s) referred in the ConditionalReconfiguraiton”), and para 96 (“MN/MCG measConfig…contains CPC-related measConfig.”) wherein measurement id/measIDs are within measurementconfig associated with MN/MCG) and wherein second measurement ID related with a condition information in the second variable refers to a measurement ID in a SCG measurement configuration (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – ameasConfig, associated with SCG…”) and para 68 (“…the SCG measConfig with the CP-related measConfig (containing the measID(s) referred in the ConditionalReconfiguraiton”) wherein measurement id/measIDs are within measurementconfig associated with SCG).
Claim 10:
DASILVA teaches a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising: a transceiver (DASILVA: FIG. 10 item 1045-1049 the transceiver); and at least one controller operably coupled to the transceiver, the at least one controller configured to (DASILVA: FIG. 10 item 1002 and 1055 the controller): For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above.
Claim 11:
DASILVA teaches the UE of claim 10. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 2 above.
Claim 17:
DASILVA teaches the UE of claim 10. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 8 above.
Claim(s) 3-7 and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DASILVA in view of CATT, the combination hereby referred to as, DASILVA-CATT, and in further view of 3GPP TS 38.331 version 16.6.0 Release 16 (see 892 06/18/2025), hereby referred to as TS38.331.
Claim 3:
DASILVA-CATT teaches the method of claim 2 and the first variable (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – a measConfig, associated with SCG, that is included in the RRCReconfgiuration message received via SRB3, or…within a RRCReconfiguraiton message embedded in a RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1. In this case, the UE maintains two independent VarMeasConfig and VarMeasReportList, one associated with each measConfig and independently performs all the prcedures…”) wherein first variable is measConfig of MCG with its own VarMeasConfig), but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID does not exist in the first variable, adding a new entry within the first variable for the conditional reconfiguration ID, or in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID exists in the variable, updating an entry in the variable corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID based on information for adding or modifying conditional RRC reconfiguration.
TS138.331, in the same field endeavor, teaches further comprising: in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID does not exist in the variable, adding a new entry within the first variable for the conditional reconfiguration ID (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.3 (“For each condReconfigId received in the condReconfigToAddModList IE the UE shall:…add a new entry for this condReconfigId within the VarConditionalReconfig…”) wherein a new entry within variable, such as VarConditionalReconfig, is added for conditional reconfiguration ID/condReconfigID that doesn’t exist within the variable/VarConditionalReconfig), or in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID exists in the variable, updating an entry in the variable corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.3 (“For each condReconfigId received in the condReconfigToAddModList IE the UE shall…if an entry with the matching condReconfigId exists in the condReconfigToAddModList within the VarConditionalReconfig…replace…within the VarConditionalReconfig with the value received for this condReconfigId…”) wherein the conditional reconfiguration ID/condReconfId exists in the variable/VarConditionalReconfig, and so an entry is updated) based on information for adding or modifying conditional RRC reconfiguration (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.1 (“The UE performs the following actions based on a received ConditionalReconfiguration IE”) wherein the conditional RRC reconfiguration is the ConditionalReconfiguration IE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the VarMeasConfig of the first variable/MeasID of DASILVA-CATT with the variable method of TS138.331 for the benefit of evaluating multiple candidate target spCells (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.1).
Claim 4:
DASILVA-CATT teaches the method of claim 2 and the second variable (DASILVA: pg 6 Table (“In NR-DC, the UE may receive two independent measConfig: -a measConfig, associated with MCG, that is included in the RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1; and – a measConfig, associated with SCG, that is included in the RRCReconfgiuration message received via SRB3, or…within a RRCReconfiguraiton message embedded in a RRCReconfiguration message received via SRB1. In this case, the UE maintains two independent VarMeasConfig and VarMeasReportList, one associated with each measConfig and independently performs all the prcedures…”) wherein second variable is measConfig of SCG with its own VarMeasConfig), but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID does not exist in the second variable, adding a new entry within the second variable for the conditional reconfiguration ID, or in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID exists in the second variable, updating an entry in the variable corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID based on information for adding or modifying the conditional RRC reconfiguration.
TS138.331, in the same field endeavor, teaches further comprising: in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID does not exist in the variable, adding a new entry within the first variable for the conditional reconfiguration ID (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.3 (“For each condReconfigId received in the condReconfigToAddModList IE the UE shall:…add a new entry for this condReconfigId within the VarConditionalReconfig…”) wherein a new entry within variable, such as VarConditionalReconfig, is added for conditional reconfiguration ID/condReconfigID that doesn’t exist within the variable/VarConditionalReconfig), or in case that the conditional reconfiguration ID exists in the variable, updating an entry in the variable corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.3 (“For each condReconfigId received in the condReconfigToAddModList IE the UE shall…if an entry with the matching condReconfigId exists in the condReconfigToAddModList within the VarConditionalReconfig…replace…within the VarConditionalReconfig with the value received for this condReconfigId…”) wherein the conditional reconfiguration ID/condReconfId exists in the variable/VarConditionalReconfig, and so an entry is modified/replaced) based on information for adding or modifying conditional RRC reconfiguration (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.1 (“The UE performs the following cations based on a received ConditionalReconfiguration IE”) wherein the conditional RRC configuration is the ConditionalReconfiguration IE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the VarMeasConfig of the first variable/MeasID of DASILVA-CATT with variable method of TS138.331 for the benefit of evaluating multiple candidate target spCells (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.1).
Claim 5:
DASILVA-CATT teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the conditional reconfiguration information includes at least one conditional reconfiguration release information (DASILVA: para 110 (“The ConditionalReconfiguration IE, shown in table below, is used to add, modify and release the configuration of conditional configuration.”) wherein conditional reconfiguration information includes release information), but does not explicitly disclose wherein a conditional reconfiguration release information includes a conditional reconfiguration identification (ID).
TS138.331, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a conditional reconfiguration release information includes a conditional reconfiguration identification (ID) (TS138.331: pg 93 pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.2 (“…for each condReconfigId value included in the condReconfigToRemove List…”) wherein release/remove information includes conditional reconfiguration ID/condReconfigId).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DASILVA-CATT with TS138.331, the combination hereby referred to as DASILVA-CATT-TS138.331, for the benefit of evaluating multiple candidate target spCells (TS138.331: pg 93 section 5.3.5.13.1).
Claim 6:
DASILVA-CATT-TS138.331 teaches the method of claim 5, releasing an entry corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID from the first variable (CATT: pg 4 (“…CPAC related measIDs, measObjects as well as the ReportConfig will be removed by UE automatically upon CPAC executed…”) and pg 4-5 (“4>for the associated reportConfigID…remove the entry with the matching reportConfigID…”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DASILVA and TS138.331 with CATT for the benefit of synchronization (CATT: Section 5).
Claim 7:
DASILVA-CATT-TS138.331 teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising: releasing an entry corresponding to the conditional reconfiguration ID from the second variable (CATT: pg 4 (“…CPAC related measIDs, measObjects as well as the ReportConfig will be removed by UE automatically upon CPAC executed…”) and pg 4-5 (“4>for the associated reportConfigID…remove the entry with the matching reportConfigID…”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified DASILVA and TS138.331 with CATT for the benefit of synchronization (CATT: Section 5).
Claim 12:
DASILVA teaches the UE of claim 11. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 3 above.
Claim 13:
DASILVA teaches the UE of claim 11. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 4 above.
Claim 14:
DASILVA teaches the UE of claim 10. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 5 above.
Claim 15:
DASILVA-TS138.133 teaches the UE of claim 14. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 6 above.
Claim 16:
DASILVA-TS138.133 teaches the UE of claim 14. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 7 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
IWAMURA et al. (US 20130070680 A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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.
/A.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights