DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communications filed on April 13, 2026. Claims 1, 8, and 15 have been amended. Claims 3, 10, and 17 have been canceled. New claims 22-24 have been added. Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11-16, 18-20, and 22-24 are pending in the application.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 4/14/2026 has been considered.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7-9, 14-16, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0279186) in view of Pi et al. (US 2011/0182174).
Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches an apparatus to improve performance of networks operating in multiple frequency bands (“The base station 401 and the wireless device 406 may be configured to send and receive data over the wireless link 411 using multiple frequency carriers” – See [0162]; The network operates in multiple frequency bands), the apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; memory configured to store machine-readable instructions; and processing circuitry configured to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions (“The base station 401 may include at least one communication interface 402, one or more processors 403, and at least one set of program code instructions 405 stored in non-transitory memory 404 and executable by the one or more processors 403” – See [0162]) to:
determine a connectivity metric for a first device synchronized with a second device (“a wireless device 2801 (e.g., a UE, or any device capable of communicating with a network) may send, to a source base station 2802 (e.g., a source gNB), a first message comprising a measurement report for one or more cells” – See [0324]; “The source base station 2802 may determine a target base station 2803, from among a plurality of potential target base stations. The source base station 2802 may determine, based on one or more elements of the measurement report, whether or not to initiate a handover procedure for the wireless device 2801” – See [0325]; The source base station receives a measurement report (connectivity metric) for a UE (first device), wherein the UE is currently synchronized and communicating with the source base station (second device));
cause, via the interface circuitry, transmission of the connectivity metric to a third device with which the first device is not synchronized (“the base station 2802 may send a second message, at step 2830, to a target base station 2803 (e.g., a target gNB). The second message may comprise a handover request message. The second message may also comprise one or more of the measurement report from the first message” – See [0325]; The source base station transmits the measurement report (connectivity metric) to a target base station (third device with which the first device is not synchronized)); and
based on a first communication from the third device, cause transmission of a second communication to the first device to cause the first device to synchronize with the third device (“The source base station 2802 may send, to the wireless device 2801 and based on the third message, a fourth message, at step 2850. The fourth message may comprise, e.g., a handover command and random access information. The handover command may comprise a command for the wireless device 2801 to execute a handover towards a cell of the target base station 2803” – See [0331]; “The wireless device 2801 may send, based on the random access information in the fourth message, a fifth message that may be part of a random access procedure with the target base station 2803, at step 2860. The wireless device 2801 may send a fifth message, e.g., comprising a random access preamble, to the target base station 2803, e.g., via a cell associated with the target base station 2803” – See [0332]; “A wireless device may initiate a two-step RA procedure, for example, for initial access such as establishing a radio link, re-establishment of a radio link, handover, establishment of UL synchronization, and/or a scheduling request when there is no UL grant” – See [0266]; “The measurement report may comprise, e.g., at least one of a list of cells, an RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power) for a cell or for each of a plurality of cells included in a list of cells” – See [0324]; “RSRP and/or an RSRQ of a target cell” – See [0346]; The source base station transmits a handover command (second communication) to the UE to cause the UE to handover to the target base station and perform random access/synchronization with the target base station, wherein the determination to handover is based on the RSRP measurements of reference signals from the target base station (first communication from the third device)).
Park does not explicitly teach that the connectivity metric is transmitted to the third device in a first radio frequency (RF) band, and the second communication is transmitted in a second RF band, wherein the first RF band has a higher frequency than the second RF band.
However, Pi teaches that a transmission between a second device and a third device is in a first RF band, and a transmission between the second device and a first device is in a second RF band, wherein the first RF band has a higher frequency than the second RF band (“Regarding FIG. 3, a mobile communication system 300 comprises various BSs including BS 310, BS 320, and BS 330, which provides service in Cell 311, Cell 321, and Cell 331, respectively. Herein, BS 310, BS 320, and BS 330 provide service to MSs using the cellular bands” – See [0071]; “Herein, BS 310, BS 320, and BS 330 may communicate using mmWave communication links, i.e., mmWave Link 391, mmWave Link 392, and mmWave Link 393 shown in FIG. 3” – See [0074]; “For convenience in explanation, the term `cellular band` denotes frequencies from a few hundred MegaHertz (MHz) to a few GHz and the term `mmWave band` denotes frequencies from a few tens of GHz to a few hundred GHz” – See [0032]; Multiple base stations (analogous to the source and target base stations of Park) communicate using a mmWave band (first RF band) and a base station communicates with a MS (analogous to the UE of Park) using a cellular band (second RF band), wherein the mmWave band has a higher frequency than the cellular band).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park such that the connectivity metric is transmitted between base stations (second and third devices) using a first RF band, and a second communication is transmitted between a base station and a UE (second device and first device) using a second RF band, wherein the first RF band has a higher frequency than the second RF band. Motivation for doing so would be to provide high throughput and low latency communication between base stations, while achieving better coverage for the communication between a base station and a UE (See Pi, [0032] and [0051]).
Regarding Claim 2, Park in view of Pi teaches the apparatus of Claim 1. Park further teaches that the processing circuitry is configured to determine whether the first communication indicates that the first device has stronger connectivity to the third device than the second device (“A measurement event may comprise … a determination that an RSRP and/or an RSRQ of a target cell exceeds a an RSRP and/or RSRQ of a source cell and/or exceeds an RSRP and/or RSRQ of a source cell by an offset power value … If the wireless device determines that one or more measurement events have occurred, then the wireless device may send a measurement report to the source base station at step 3003” – See [0346]; The first communication indicates that the UE (first device) has a higher RSRP (stronger connectivity) for the target base station (third device) compared to the source base station (second device)).
Regarding Claim 7, Park in view of Pi teaches the apparatus of Claim 1. Park further teaches that the connectivity metric includes at least one of a received signal strength indicator, a bit error rate, or a link quality indicator (“A measurement event may comprise … a determination that an RSRP and/or an RSRQ of a target cell exceeds a an RSRP and/or RSRQ of a source cell and/or exceeds an RSRP and/or RSRQ of a source cell by an offset power value … If the wireless device determines that one or more measurement events have occurred, then the wireless device may send a measurement report to the source base station at step 3003” – See [0346]; The RSRP indicates a received signal strength/link quality).
Claims 8 and 15 are rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 1.
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 2.
Claim 14 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 23, Park in view of Pi teaches the apparatus of Claim 1. Pi further teaches that a separation between the first RF band and the second RF band is more than one GHz (“the term `cellular band` denotes frequencies from a few hundred MegaHertz (MHz) to a few GHz and the term `mmWave band` denotes frequencies from a few tens of GHz to a few hundred GHz” – See [0032]; The mmWave band (first RF band) is in the range of tens of GHz, while the cellular band (second RF band) includes frequencies in the hundreds of MHz. Thus, the separation between bands is more than one GHz).
Claims 4, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0279186) in view of Pi et al. (US 2011/0182174) and further in view of Abotabl et al. (US 2022/0271909).
Regarding Claim 4, Park in view of Pi teaches the apparatus of Claim 1. As shown above with respect to claim 1, Park teaches that the connectivity metric is a first connectivity metric. Park and Pi do not explicitly teach that the processing circuitry is configured to determine a second connectivity metric for a fourth device, wherein the fourth device is unsynchronized with the second device, and wherein the second connectivity metric is representative of a connectivity strength between the second device and the fourth device.
However, Abotabl teaches that the processing circuitry is configured to determine a second connectivity metric for a fourth device, wherein the fourth device is unsynchronized with the second device, and wherein the second connectivity metric is representative of a connectivity strength between the second device and the fourth device (“interference that the base station measures during each slot and/or based on interference that served UEs measure and report to the base station (e.g., the base station may determine that a neighboring base station is using one or more uplink slots as downlink slots based on measuring a high level of interference during the uplink slots and/or may determine that a neighboring base station is using a downlink slot as an uplink slot based on a UE reporting a high level of interference during the downlink slot). . Additionally, or alternatively, neighboring base stations may share information related to respective TDD patterns that are in use at the neighboring base stations (e.g., over a backhaul interface)” – See [0059]; “simultaneous uplink and downlink transmissions may generally occur (or may be more likely to occur) when communication associated with the neighboring base stations is unsynchronized or desynchronized (e.g., in a cross-border scenario where the neighboring base stations are located in different countries, where the neighboring base stations are associated with different wireless network operators, and/or where the neighboring base stations otherwise do not coordinate timing of uplink and downlink communications)” – See [0053]; The serving/source base station determines a second connectivity metric for a plurality of neighbor base stations (e.g., fourth, fifth, etc.) in a different wireless operator network, wherein the connectivity metric represents an interference strength between the source/serving base station (second device) and the neighbor base station of a different wireless operator (fourth device)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park to determine a second connectivity metric for a fourth device, wherein the fourth device is unsynchronized with the second device, and wherein the second connectivity metric is representative of a connectivity strength between the second device and the fourth device. Motivation for doing so would be to enable mitigation of cross-link interference (See Abotabl, [0053]).
Claims 11 and 18 are rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 4.
Claims 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0279186) in view of Pi et al. (US 2011/0182174) and further in view of Abedini et al. (US 2019/0394738).
Regarding Claim 22, Park in view of Pi teaches the apparatus of Claim 1. Pi further teaches that the second RF band includes a sub-1 GHz frequency band (“the term `cellular band` denotes frequencies from a few hundred MegaHertz (MHz) to a few GHz” – See [0032]; The cellular band (second RF band) includes frequencies in the hundreds of MHz, which is less than 1 GHz).
Park and Pi do not explicitly teach that the first RF band includes a 2.4 GHz frequency band.
However, Abedini teaches that the first RF band includes a 2.4 GHz frequency band (“each of the multiple communication links may support multiple radio access technologies (RATs) (e.g., channels in one or more of millimeter wave (mmW) bands (e.g., above 6 GHz, for example in the range of 30 to 300 GHz) and sub-6 bands (e.g., below 6 GHz, for example in the range of 1 to 6 GHz) for communication on a backhaul or access connection” – See [0102]; Wireless backhaul transmissions between base stations (i.e., the first RF band for communications between the second and third devices) is in the range of 1 to 6 GHz, which includes the 2.4 GHz band).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park such that the first RF band includes a 2.4 GHz frequency band. Motivation for doing so would be to provide support of multiple RATs (See Abedini, [0102]).
Claim 24 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 22.
Response to Arguments
On pages 8-10 of the remarks, Applicant argues in substance that Mino Diaz does not teach “cause, … in a first [RF] band, transmission of the connectivity metric to a third device …; and …, cause transmission of a second communication to the first device in a second RF band … wherein the first RF band has a higher frequency than the second RF band,” as recited in independent claims 1, 8, and 15. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection. In response to the amended limitations, the Examiner relies upon the newly-cited Pi reference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 19, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 Scott M Sciacca whose telephone number is (571)270-1919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. EST.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/SCOTT M SCIACCA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights