DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 1, 30, and 34 have been amended; Claims 4, 8, 13, and 16-29 have been canceled; No Claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, 12, 14-15, and 30-36 are subject to examination.
Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to 1, 30, and 34 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12, 14-15, and 30-36. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12, 14-15, and 30-36 is/are hereby withdrawn.
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
Applicants’ arguments filed 06/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants’ Arguments:
The applicant argues in substance that FUKUDA in view of SIOMINA does not teach the amended limitations, especially wherein the second message indicates a negotiable part and a non-negotiable part in a MDT configuration. The examiner uses FUKUDA to only teach the MDT configuration without distinguishing between the negotiable part and non-negotiable part. Likewise, SIOMINA simply teaches a neighbor cell list, which is not a negotiable parameter, and does not indicate both a negotiable part and a non-negotiable part. Furthermore, SIOMINA does not teach the UE evaluating a received MDT configuration parameter for suitability and suggestion according to the three-prong clause of the limitation.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, a “negotiable part” of an MDT configuration is merely defined as a configured part open to discussion or change, as seen in further limitations wherein UE can suggest an alternative if not suitable. SIOMINA’s cell lists are configured to the UE, wherein the UE combines the lists and uses the value since it is suitable (SIOMINA: FIG. 3) and the UE can also suggest a cell to be added to the list based on its own detection since it is not suitable (SIOMINA: FIG. 4). The configured cell list can be used, at least in part, for MDT measurements (SIOMINA: para 20). SIOMINA’s cell list is therefore considered, at the least, a “negotiable part” of an MDT configuration. The examiner recommends including language to define what qualifies as a negotiable parameter for MDT configuration and/or how the negotiable part is indicated, such as with an extra separate IE for each part/parameter in the MDT configuration.
In addition, FUKUDA’s pg 4 para 7 discusses MDT configuration parameters such as: measurement target, measurement trigger, measurement period, absolute time, and measurement area. While FUKUDA does not explicitly disclose these are a negotiable part in the MDT configuration, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the measurement area parameter of FUKUDA with the negotiable cell list of SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28). The other MDT configuration parameters of FUKUDA could be interpreted as non-negotiable as the UE does not negotiate these parameters, and wherein indicating these parameters is indicating negotiable and non-negotiable parts. The examiner recommends including language to define how the negotiable part and the non-negotiable part are differentiated/indicated, such as with an extra separate IE for each part/parameter in the MDT configuration with a specific value that indicates either negotiable or non-negotiable.
For the sake of prosecution and clarity, the examiner has reformatted the arguments into the rejection below.
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 that response above.
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, 3, 5-6, 10-12, 14-15, 30, 32-34, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FUKUDA (JP 20120853235) (see IDS 11/20/2023 and FOR 7/29/2025) in view of SIOMINA et al. (US 20110201332 A1) (see 892 09/04/2026), hereby referred to as SIOMINA.
Claim 1:
FUKUDA teaches a method for wireless communication, comprising: negotiating, by a radio access network (RAN) node, a minimization of drive test (MDT) configuration parameter of a user equipment (UE) by: receiving, by the RAN node, a first message from a core network (CN) or an operation and maintain system (OAM), the first message comprising a MDT configuration parameter (FUKUDA: pg 4 para 7 (“…measurement parameters are the measurement target…measurement trigger…measurement period…absolute time…and measurement area…”) and pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”)wherein the first message includes MDT configuration parameters); in response to receiving the first message, determining, by the RAN node, whether the UE is suitable to carry out a MDT task corresponding to the first message (FUKUKDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT…transmits the information of the selected…UE…to the radio base station eNB…”) and pg 8 para 3 (“…eNB generates an MDT Configuration message for setting measurement parameters according to the information received from…OAM, and transmits the generated MDT Configuration message to the…UE…”) wherein eNB/RAN nodes determines the suitable UE based on the OAM selecting the UE); in response to the determining that the UE is suitable to carry out the MDT task corresponding to the first message, sending, by the RAN node, a second message to the UE, the second message comprising the non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a non-negotiable part in a MDT configuration (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 3 (“…eNB generates an MDT Configuration message for setting measurement parameters according to the information received from…OAM, and transmits the generated MDT Configuration message to the…UE…”) wherein eNB/RAN nodes sends second message with MDT configuration parameter, wherein a non-negotiable parameter is any parameter the UE does not negotiate); receiving, by the RAN node, a third message from the UE (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 4 (“…UE…generates a UEInformationReponse message including the acquired MDT data, and transmits the generated UEInformationResponse message to…eNB…”) wherein the third message is the UEinformationResponse), and sending, by the RAN node, a fourth message to the CN or the OAM (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 5(“…eNB…transmits the acquired MDT data to the…OAM…”) wherein the UEinformationresponse is forwarded in a fourth message to the OAM); and in response to receiving the second message comprising a non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter, a value of the non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 3 (“When receiving the MDT Configuration message...UE sets the measurement parameter included…”) wherein a non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter is any parameter that the UE does not provide a suggestion for).
However, FUKUDA does not explicitly disclose a negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a negotiable part; wherein the third and fourth message comprises the at least one value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter; wherein: in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that a value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is not suitable, the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises a value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter, and in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that the value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is suitable, the value of negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE, and the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises the same value for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter
SIOMINA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the second message comprising the negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a negotiable part (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), para 9 (“The neighbor cell lists are typically defined by the network and signaled to UEs…”), and para 20 (“The measurement categories…minimization of drive tests…”) wherein the negotiable parameter is a cell list which is indicated in the message); the third message comprising at least one value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 308 and FIG. 4 item 408 (“Reporting the composite neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to network”) wherein the reported cell list is the suggested value); wherein: in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that a value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is not suitable, the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises a value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 4 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to the network”), para 28 (“…neighbor cells on which measurements are performed…are more suitable than the cells in a list of cells provided…”), and para 90 (“…the UE has to blindly detect neighbor cells for mobility measurements…enabling a UE to dynamically…create a composite neighbor cell list by combining any available neighbor cell list with one or more blindly detected cells.”) wherein UE suggests a value for the MDT parameter/cell list of more suitable cells), and in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that the value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is suitable, the value of negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE, and the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises the same value for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to the network”) wherein the values are suitable and therefore the UE does not need to negotiate new values and sends back the same value/cell list that was configured to the UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified at least one parameter for the MDT configuration, such as the measurement area parameter of FUKUDA, with the negotiable cell list of SIOMINA the combination hereby referred to as FUKUDA-SIOMINA, for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 3:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: the first message comprises at least one of the following: an information element indicating whether a procedure is for a MDT configuration parameter negotiating process (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”) wherein the first message itself indicates to participate in an MDT configuration parameter negotiation process).
Claim 5:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches wherein: in response to the negotiable MDT configuration parameter, a value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is suggested by at least one of the following: the RAN the UE (SIOMINA: FIG. 4 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to the network”), para 28 (“…neighbor cells on which measurements are performed…are more suitable than the cells in a list of cells provided…”), and para 90 (“…the UE has to blindly detect neighbor cells for mobility measurements…enabling a UE to dynamically…create a composite neighbor cell list by combining any available neighbor cell list with one or more blindly detected cells.”) wherein UE suggests a value for the MDT parameter/cell list of more suitable cells).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 6:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: in response to the first message comprising the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”), the first message further comprises a range for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), para 9 (“The neighbor cell lists are typically defined by the network and signaled to UEs…”), and para 20 (“The measurement categories…minimization of drive tests…”) wherein the negotiable parameter range is a cell list).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 10:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: the second message indicates whether a procedure is for a MDT configuration parameter negotiating process as a unreal MDT configuring process (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”) (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”)) wherein parameters not related to cell list are an indication of unreal MDT configuring/non-negotiable MDT).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 11:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: the second message indicates a negotiable part and a non-negotiable part in a MDT configuration (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”) (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”)) wherein parameters not related to cell list are an indication of non-negotiable MDT and cell list is an indication of negotiable MDT).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 12:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein: the second message indicates a valid range for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), para 9 (“The neighbor cell lists are typically defined by the network and signaled to UEs…”), and para 20 (“The measurement categories…minimization of drive tests…”) wherein the negotiable parameter range is a cell list).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 14:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the RAN node, a fifth message from the CN or the OAM, the fifth message comprising at least one non-negotiable MDT configuration item for the UE to perform (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”) wherein a fifth message is any message from the CN or OAM which has a non-negotiable MDT configuration); and sending, by the RAN node, a configuration message to the UE, the configuration message comprising the at least one MDT configuration item, so that the UE performs according to the at least one MDT configuration item and reports a MDT measurement result (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 3 (“When receiving the MDT Configuration message...UE sets the measurement parameter included…”) and pg 9 para 4 (“…UE…generates a UEInformationReponse message including the acquired MDT data, and transmits the generated UEInformationResponse message to…eNB…”) wherein a non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter is any parameter that the UE does not provide a suggestion for).
Claim 15:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the RAN node, a fifth message from the UE, the fifth message comprising at least a updated value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 4 item 410 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list…”) and para 142 (“A combined list…could be provided to another node…the list may be stored for later use or distribution…for delivery to other nodes or for use within the node…enable the node to provide an accurate selection of neighbor cells which is adapted…”) wherein UE sends an updated cell list) (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 4 (“…UE…generates a UEInformationReponse message including the acquired MDT data, and transmits the generated UEInformationResponse message to…eNB…”) wherein the fifth message is the UEinformationResponse);and sending, by the RAN node, a sixth message to the CN or the OAM, the sixth message comprising the updated value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter. (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 5(“…eNB…transmits the acquired MDT data to the…OAM…”) wherein the UEinformationresponse is forwarded in a fourth message to the OAM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDKA with SIOMINA for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 30:
FUKUDA teaches An apparatus comprising: a memory storing instructions; anda processor in communication with the memory, wherein, when the processor executes the instructions, the processor is configured to cause the apparatus to perform negotiating a minimization of drive test (MDT) configuration parameter of a user equipment (UE) (FUKUDA: pg 14 para 1-3 the apparatus being the radio base station eNB) by: receiving a first message from a core network (CN) or an operation and maintain system (OAM), the first message comprising a MDT configuration parameter (FUKUDA: pg 4 para 7 (“…measurement parameters are the measurement target…measurement trigger…measurement period…absolute time…and measurement area…”) and pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT, and sets measurement parameters to the selected radio terminal UE…transmits the information of the selected…UE and the information of the determined measurement parameter to the radio base station eNB…”)wherein the first message includes MDT configuration parameters); in response to receiving the first message, determining whether the UE is suitable to carry out a MDT task corresponding to the first message (FUKUKDA: pg 8 para 2 (“…OAM…selects a radio terminal UE to be used for MDT…transmits the information of the selected…UE…to the radio base station eNB…”) and pg 8 para 3 (“…eNB generates an MDT Configuration message for setting measurement parameters according to the information received from…OAM, and transmits the generated MDT Configuration message to the…UE…”) wherein eNB/RAN nodes determines the suitable UE based on the OAM selecting the UE); in response to the determining that the UE is suitable to carry out the MDT task corresponding to the first message, sending a second message to the UE, the second message comprising the non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a non-negotiable part in a MDT configuration (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 3 (“…eNB generates an MDT Configuration message for setting measurement parameters according to the information received from…OAM, and transmits the generated MDT Configuration message to the…UE…”) wherein eNB/RAN nodes sends second message with MDT configuration parameter, wherein a non-negotiable parameter is any parameter the UE does not negotiate); receiving a third message from the UE (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 4 (“…UE…generates a UEInformationReponse message including the acquired MDT data, and transmits the generated UEInformationResponse message to…eNB…”) wherein the third message is the UEinformationResponse); and sending a fourth message to the CN or the OAM (FUKUDA: pg 9 para 5(“…eNB…transmits the acquired MDT data to the…OAM…”) wherein the UEinformationresponse is forwarded in a fourth message to the OAM), wherein: in response to receiving the second message comprising a non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter, a value of the non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE (FUKUDA: pg 8 para 3 (“When receiving the MDT Configuration message...UE sets the measurement parameter included…”) wherein a non-negotiable MDT configuration parameter is any parameter that the UE does not provide a suggestion for).
However, FUKUDA does not explicitly disclose a negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a negotiable part; wherein the third and fourth message comprises the at least one value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter; wherein: in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that a value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is not suitable, the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises a value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter, and in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that the value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is suitable, the value of negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE, and the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises the same value for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter
SIOMINA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the second message comprising the negotiable MDT configuration parameter, wherein the second message indicates a negotiable part (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Receiving at least two neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), FIG. 4 item 401 (“Receiving at least one neighbor cell lists for measurements…”), para 9 (“The neighbor cell lists are typically defined by the network and signaled to UEs…”), and para 20 (“The measurement categories…minimization of drive tests…”) wherein the negotiable parameter is a cell list which is indicated in the message); the third message comprising at least one value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 item 308 and FIG. 4 item 408 (“Reporting the composite neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to network”) wherein the reported cell list is the suggested value); wherein: in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that a value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is not suitable, the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises a value suggested by the UE for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 4 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to the network”), para 28 (“…neighbor cells on which measurements are performed…are more suitable than the cells in a list of cells provided…”), and para 90 (“…the UE has to blindly detect neighbor cells for mobility measurements…enabling a UE to dynamically…create a composite neighbor cell list by combining any available neighbor cell list with one or more blindly detected cells.”) wherein UE suggests a value for the MDT parameter/cell list of more suitable cells), and in response to receiving the second message and determining by the UE that the value of the negotiable MDT configuration parameter is suitable, the value of negotiable MDT configuration parameter is followed by the UE, and the third message, sent by the UE in response to the second message and received by the RAN node from the UE, comprises the same value for the negotiable MDT configuration parameter (SIOMINA: FIG. 3 (“Reporting the composite dynamic neighbor cell list and/or result of measurements to the network”) wherein the values are suitable and therefore the UE does not need to negotiate new values and sends back the same value/cell list that was configured to the UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified at least one parameter for the MDT configuration, such as the measurement area parameter of FUKUDA, with the negotiable cell list of SIOMINA the combination hereby referred to as FUKUDA-SIOMINA, for the benefit of flexibility and dynamic adaptation (SIOMINA: para 28).
Claim 32:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the apparatus according to claim 30. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 3 above.
Claim 33:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the apparatus according to claim 30. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 6 above.
Claim 34:
FUKUDA teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions, wherein, the instructions, when executed by a processor, are configured to cause the processor to perform negotiating a minimization of drive test (MDT) configuration parameter of a user equipment (UE) (FUKUDA: pg 14 para 1-3 the apparatus being the radio base station eNB). For further limitations, see rejection for claim 30 above.
Claim 36:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the apparatus according to claim 34. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 6 above.
Claim(s) 2, 7, 31, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FUKUDA in view of SIOMINA, the combination hereby referred to as FUKUDA-SIOMINA, and in further view of HELMERS et al. (US 20220394609 A1) (see 892 07/29/2025), hereby referred to as HELMERS.
Claim 2:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein: the first message comprises at least one of the following: a trace start message; an initial context setup request; or a handover request message.
HELMERS, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein: the first message comprises at least one of the following: a trace start message or an initial context setup request (HELMERS: para 24 (“…trace configuration parameters may directly include NR MDT specific configuration triggers…the parameters may be implemented as MDT specific configuration parameters in an initial context setup request message.”) wherein MDT configuration parameters message/first message is trace start message or initial context setup request).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDA-SIOMINA with HELMERS for the benefit of preventing data loss (HELMERS: para 28).
Claim 7:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: in response to the determining that the UE is not suitable to carry out the MDT task corresponding to the first message, sending, by the RAN node, a dedicated message to the CN or the OAM indicating the UE being unsuitable to carry out the MDT task.
HELMERS, in the same field of endeavor, teaches in response to the determining that the UE is not suitable to carry out the MDT task corresponding to the first message, sending, by the RAN node, a dedicated message to the CN or the OAM indicating the UE being unsuitable to carry out the MDT task (HELMERS: para 32 (“…the exchange may result in feedback information towards the CN entity sot that is receives information on impossibility to apply the sent MDT configuration(s)…”) wherein if a UE is not suitable to apply configurations, then dedicated message is sent to the CN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDA-SIOMINA with HELMERS for the benefit of preventing data loss (HELMERS: para 28).
Claim 31:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the apparatus of claim 30. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 2 above.
Claim 35:
FUKUDA-SIOMINA teaches the apparatus of claim 34. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 2 above.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FUKUDA in view of SIOMINA, the combination hereby referred to as FUKUDA-SIOMINA, and in further view of WANG et al. (US 20230199541 A1) (see 892 07/29/2025), hereby referred to as WANG.
Claim 9:
FUKUDA teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein: the second message comprises a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising a RRC reconfiguration message
WANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein: the second message comprises a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising a RRC reconfiguration message (WANG: FIG. 1103 (“RRC Reconfiguration Request”) wherein the second message carrying MDT parameters to the UE is a RRC reconfiguration message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FUKUDA-SIOMINA with WANG for the benefit of avoid data loss and reusing valid configurations (WANG: para 40).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to 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