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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/3/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Claims 1-11 and 14-20 in the reply filed on 1/13/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12 and 13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.-The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 states “communication unit" and “release unit”. Examiner respectfully requests that Applicant specifically point out the portion of the Specification that provides support for these limitations. It is not clear what device structure performs the functions related to these units. Appropriate correction is required if unable to provide support reference.
Claim 17 states "configuration unit and “communication unit”. Examiner respectfully requests that Applicant specifically point out the portion of the Specification that provides support for these limitations. It is not clear what device structure performs the functions related to these units. Appropriate correction is required if unable to provide support reference.
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.
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 14 states "communication unit" and “release unit”. It is not clear what device structure in the disclosure performs the functions related to the units in the claim, hence rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required if unable to provide support reference.
Claim 17 states "configuration unit" and “communication unit”. It is not clear what device structure in the disclosure performs the functions related to the units in the claim, hence rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required if unable to provide support reference.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) ELEMENT IN CLAIM FORA COMBINATION.—An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would
be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation
of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is invoked.
As explained in MPEP 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as
a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with
35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
If stated below, claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
If stated below, this application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: communication unit, release unit, and configuration unit in claims 14 and 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 and 14-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (WO 2018/056785, attached with this Office Action)
Referring to Claim 1, Kim et al. disclose a communication method comprising: receiving, by a network device, a measurement report (pars 370-374, base station receives information/uplink data/operation in consideration of channel quality) from a terminal in a single-signaling connected state (par 372, terminal with only SRB0 and SRB1, others suspended, interpreted as single-signaling connected state); and determining, by the network device based on the measurement report, whether to release a communication connection to the terminal in the single-signaling connected state (Fig. 5d and pars 370-374, determine/implement to suspend/release; also, resume connection).
Referring to Claim 2 as applied to Claim 1 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein radio bearers RBs between the terminal in the single-signaling connected state and the network device comprise only a signaling radio bearer o (SRBo) and a signaling radio bearer (SRB1) (par 372, state with only SRB0 and SRB1).
Referring to Claim 3 as applied to Claim 1 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the communication connection is a radio resource control RRC connection (pars 372 and 373, RRC connection).
Referring to Claim 4 as applied to Claim 1 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, further comprising: sending, by the network device, a measurement configuration to the terminal, wherein the measurement configuration comprises a measurement object and a reporting condition (par 372, channel quality, cells).
Referring to Claim 5 as applied to Claim 4 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the measurement object comprises a serving cell currently connected to the terminal, or at least one neighboring cell of the currently connected serving cell (par 372, channel quality, serving and neighbor cells).
Referring to Claim 6 as applied to Claim 4 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the reporting condition comprises a measurement event or a reporting periodicity (pars 371-373, move/channel quality).
Referring to Claim 7 as applied to Claim 6 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the measurement event comprises: Event A2: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than an absolute threshold, Event A3: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than that of a serving cell by an offset value, Event A4: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than an absolute threshold, Event A5: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than a first absolute threshold, and signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than a second absolute threshold, Event B1: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than an absolute threshold, or Event B2: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than a first absolute threshold, and signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than a second absolute threshold (pars 371-373, channel quality, serving/neighbor cell; also, par 325, threshold).
Referring to Claim 8 as applied to Claim 7 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the measurement report comprises at least one of the measurement events (pars 371-373, channel quality).
Referring to Claim 9 as applied to Claim 6 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein the measurement report comprises a reference signal measurement value of at least one currently connected serving cell or neighboring cell (pars 308 and 372, reference signal, quality).
Referring to Claim 10 as applied to Claim 1 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, wherein, before performing a release, the method further comprises: detecting a connection status of the terminal; and performing the release when determining that the terminal is in the single-signaling connected state (par 372, information regarding suspended SRBs except SRB0 and SRB1).
Referring to Claim 11 as applied to Claim 1 above, Kim et al. disclose the method, further comprising, after completing a release, enabling the terminal to send a connection establishment request to a neighboring cell whose signal quality is better than that of a serving cell connected to the terminal before the release (connection pars 371-374, resume).
Referring to Claim 14, Kim et al. disclose a network device (pars 370-374, base station), comprising: a communication unit (pars 370-374, base station communication component) configured to receive a measurement report from a terminal in a single-signaling connected state (pars 370-374, base station receives information/uplink data/operation in consideration of channel quality); and a release unit configured to determine, based on the measurement report, whether to release a communication connection to the terminal in the single-signaling connected state (Fig. 5d and pars 370-374, determine/implement to suspend/release component; also, resume connection).
Referring to Claim 15 as applied to Claim 14 above, Kim et al. discloses the device, wherein radio bearers RBs between the terminal in the single-signaling connected state and the network device comprise only a signaling radio bearer o (SRBo) and a signaling radio bearer (SRB1) (par 372, state with only SRB0 and SRB1).
Referring to Claim 16 as applied to Claim 14 above, Kim et al. discloses the device, wherein the communication connection is a radio resource control RRC connection (pars 372 and 373, RRC connection).
Referring to Claim 17 as applied to Claim 14 above, Kim et al. discloses the device, further comprising a configuration unit configured to configure a measurement configuration, wherein the communication unit is configured to send the measurement configuration to the terminal, and wherein the measurement configuration comprises a measurement object and a reporting condition (par 372, channel quality informed, cells).
Referring to Claim 18 as applied to Claim 17 above, Kim et al. disclose the device, wherein the measurement object comprises a serving cell currently connected to the terminal, or at least one neighboring cell of the currently connected serving cell (par 372, channel quality, serving and neighbor cells).
Referring to Claim 19 as applied to Claim 18 above, Kim et al. disclose the device, wherein the reporting condition comprises a measurement event or a reporting periodicity (pars 371-373, move/channel quality).
Referring to Claim 20 as applied to Claim 19 above, Kim et al. disclose the device, wherein the measurement event comprises: Event A2: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than an absolute threshold, Event A3: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than that of a serving cell by an offset value, Event A4: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than an absolute threshold, Event A5: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than a first absolute threshold, and signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than a second absolute threshold, Event B1: signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than an absolute threshold, or Event B2: signal quality of a serving cell is lower than a first absolute threshold, and signal quality of a neighboring cell is higher than a second absolute threshold (pars 371-373, channel quality, serving/neighbor cell; also, par 325, threshold).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUHAIL KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7187. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 8:30am-6:30pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 5712727915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Suhail Khan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642