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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/05/2026 with respect to independent claim 8 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding independent claim 8:
Applicant submitted (Remarks, pages) that the cited art does not disclose or suggest “for different slices, a same first frequency point and different cells, performing cell reselection according to a second rule, wherein the second rule comprises: performing the cell reselection according to a conventional frequency point priority of the first frequency point”, as cited in independent claim 8. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Cheng teaches suggest “for different slices, a same first frequency point and different cells, performing cell reselection according to a second rule, wherein the second rule comprises: performing the cell reselection according to a conventional frequency point priority of the first frequency point”. In [0054], Cheng discloses “a base station may assign dedicated priorities to one or more configured cell frequencies in an RRC release message”. In [0072], Cheng discloses “the supported slice information may also include for each supported slice, a respective per-slice frequency priority value for each frequency on which the supported slice is supported”, and in [0074], “for cell reselection (e.g., intra-frequency cell reselection and/or inter-frequency cell reselection) in an RRC idle mode and/or an RRC inactive mode, the intended slice(s) of the UE 120 may be one or more allowed slices (e.g., allowed S-NSSAI(s)) for the UE 120”. In [0076], Cheng discloses “As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 520, the UE 120 may determine S-criteria values (“S values”) and a ranking criterion (“R-criterion”) value (“R value” or “ranking value”) for the serving cell and the neighbor cells”. In [0080], Cheng discloses “by reference number 530, the UE 120 may select, as a serving cell, a candidate cell, from the set of candidate cells”. In [0100], Cheng discloses “the UE 120 may select a serving frequency, from the plurality of configured frequencies, based at least in part on the respective frequency priority determined for each frequency of the plurality of configured frequencies”. In [0243], Cheng further discloses “The signaling format to support slice specific cell reselection is: a list of {frequency, list of [Slice group ID, frequency priority value, list of PCIs]}, where frequency priority value reuse legacy range of 0-7)”. Thus, for different slices, the cell reselection is performed according to frequency point priorities.
Therefore, for the reasons shown above, the prior art by Cheng clearly teaches all the limitations in independent claim 8.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1 and 11 has been withdrawn.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (US 2024/0121710).
Regarding Claim 8, Cheng teaches a method for wireless communication, comprising: for different slices, a same first frequency point and different cells, performing cell reselection according to a second rule, wherein the second rule comprises: performing the cell reselection according to a conventional frequency point priority of the first frequency point ([0054] a base station may assign dedicated priorities to one or more configured cell frequencies in an RRC release message. In this case, the base station may assign a dedicated priority to a cell frequency based on an allowed NSSAI supported on the cell frequency; [0072] the supported slice information may also include for each supported slice, a respective per-slice frequency priority value for each frequency on which the supported slice is supported; [0074] for cell reselection (e.g., intra-frequency cell reselection and/or inter-frequency cell reselection) in an RRC idle mode and/or an RRC inactive mode, the intended slice(s) of the UE 120 may be one or more allowed slices (e.g., allowed S-NSSAI(s)) for the UE 120. In some aspects, for cell reselection in the RRC inactive mode, the intended slice(s) of the UE 120 may be one or more slices (e.g., S-NSSAI(s)) associated with one or more activated PDU sessions with UE context that are suspended when the UE is in the RRC inactive mode; [0076] As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 520, the UE 120 may determine S-criteria values (“S values”) and a ranking criterion (“R-criterion”) value (“R value” or “ranking value”) for the serving cell and the neighbor cells; [0079] As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 525, the UE 120 may determine a set of candidate cells within a range of a highest R value; [0080] As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 530, the UE 120 may select, as a serving cell, a candidate cell, from the set of candidate cells; [0100] the UE 120 may select a serving frequency, from the plurality of configured frequencies, based at least in part on the respective frequency priority determined for each frequency of the plurality of configured frequencies; [0243] Example Proposal 6: The signaling format to support slice specific cell reselection is: a list of {frequency, list of [Slice group ID, frequency priority value, list of PCIs]}, where frequency priority value reuse legacy range of 0-7).
Regarding Claim 9, Cheng teaches a number of slices is one or more ([0074] for cell reselection (e.g., intra-frequency cell reselection and/or inter-frequency cell reselection) in an RRC idle mode and/or an RRC inactive mode, the intended slice(s) of the UE 120 may be one or more allowed slices (e.g., allowed S-NSSAI(s)) for the UE 120. In some aspects, for cell reselection in the RRC inactive mode, the intended slice(s) of the UE 120 may be one or more slices (e.g., S-NSSAI(s)) associated with one or more activated PDU sessions with UE context that are suspended when the UE is in the RRC inactive mode).
Regarding Claim 10, Cheng teaches the slice is of any one of following levels: cell, frequency point, tracking area or registration area ([0072] As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 510, the UE 120 may receive, from the serving cell, supported slice information for the serving cell and the neighbor cells).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-6, 11 and 14-16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant’s invention in claims 1, 4-6, 11 and 14-16 is drawn to a method for wireless communication, comprising: for a same slice, a same frequency point and different cells, in a case that frequency point priorities of the frequency point for the different cells are different, determining a first frequency point priority of the frequency point according to a first rule, wherein the first frequency point priority is used by a terminal device to perform cell reselection, wherein the first rule comprises: determining the first frequency point priority according to channel qualities of the different cells and the frequency point priorities of the frequency point for the different cells, comprising: selecting a cell with a highest channel quality in the different cells, and determining a frequency point priority of the frequency point for the cell with the highest channel quality as the first frequency point priority.
Applicant’s independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “wherein the first rule comprises: determining the first frequency point priority according to channel qualities of the different cells and the frequency point priorities of the frequency point for the different cells, comprising: selecting a cell with a highest channel quality in the different cells, and determining a frequency point priority of the frequency point for the cell with the highest channel quality as the first frequency point priority”. Applicant’s independent claim 1 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Independent claim 11 is interpreted and allowed for the same reason as set forth above. Accordingly, applicant’s claims 1, 4-6, 11 and 14-16 are allowed for these reasons and for the reasons recited by applicant in the Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks (pages 6-8) filed on 01/05/2026.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hwang (US 2019/0174406) teaches method of serviced-based cell selection and reselection control.
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 YU-WEN CHANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7645. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-5:00pm PT.
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, Un Cho can be reached at 571-272-7919. 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.
/YU-WEN CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413