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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JAPAN 2022-147340 filed on 9/15/2022.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 9/6/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasaka et al. (US 2018/0103397 A1, hereinafter Nagasaka) in view of Feng et al. (WO 2014/101444 A1, hereinafter Feng).
Regarding claim 1:
Nagasaka teaches a communication system (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7 and para. [0018], “an operational overview of the mobile communication system”) comprising a first base station (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, eNB 200-1 (CELL 250-1)) that includes a first controller (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 3, eNB 200, Memory 230 and Processor 240; para. [0052], “The memory 230 and the processor 240 constitute a controller.”) and a second base station (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, eNB 200-2 (CELL 250-2)) that includes a second controller (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 3, eNB 200, Memory 230 and Processor 240; para. [0052], “The memory 230 and the processor 240 constitute a controller.”), wherein the first controller is configured to transmit a handover request to the second base station in a case where handover of a user terminal to the second base station is required (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, S103, “HANDOVER REQUEST”; para. [0082], “The following description will be given on the assumption that the eNB 200-1 has decided to cause the UE 100 to perform the handover to the cell 250-2.”; para. [0083], “In step S103, the eNB 200-1 transmits a handover request (Handover Request) to the eNB 200-2 that manages the cell 250-2. The eNB 200-2 receives the handover request.”), the second controller is configured to transmit a handover response to the first base station in response to reception of the handover request (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, S105, “HANDOVER REQUEST ACK”; para. [0087], “The following description will be given on the assumption that the eNB 200-2 has determined to admit the handover request.”; para. [0088], “In step S105, the eNB 200-2 transmits a handover request acknowledgment (Handover Request Ack) to the eNB 200-1. The eNB 200-1 receives the handover request acknowledgment.”; para. [0093], “Further, in the present embodiment, the eNB 200-2 transmits, to the eNB 200-1, physics-related information (PHY-related information), timing information, and power information together with the handover request acknowledgment.”), and the first controller is configured to transmit a handover command to the user terminal in response to reception of the handover response (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, S107, “RRC CONN.RECONF.INCL. mobilityControlInformation”; para. [0102], “In step S107, the eNB 200-1 transmits, to the UE 100, RRC connection reestablishment information (RRC Conn.Reconf.) including mobility control information (mobilityControlinformation) by using the downlink radio resource assignment. The UE 100 receives the RRC connection reestablishment information.”; para. [0103], “The eNB 200-1 transmits information received from the eNB 200-2 in step S105, specifically, the radio resource assignment, the physics-related information, the timing information, and the power information, together with the RRC connection reestablishment information.”).
Nagasaka does not explicitly teach wherein the handover response includes a renewable energy use rate of the second base station and wherein the handover command includes the renewable energy use rate or a data transmission control command according to the renewable energy use rate.
In the same field of endeavor, Feng teaches an access selection method and system for a renewable energy-powered base station and acquiring information affecting candidate base station access selection (see, Feng: Abstract (Page 1 of the English translated)). Feng teaches wherein (see, Feng: Page 3 (Page 3 of the English translated), “receiving information affecting candidate base station access selection, and the information about the candidate base station access selection includes: a wireless link state, a minimum transmission rate, a maximum transmit power, a current energy storage of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, and a terminal. The amount of data that needs to be transferred”) and wherein (see, Feng: Page 3, “calculating a link energy consumption characteristic when the terminal accesses the candidate base station according to the current energy storage of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, the amount of data required to be transmitted by the terminal, and the optimal energy efficiency”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Nagasaka in combination of the teachings of Feng in order for the source base station to receive information affecting candidate base station access selection including a current energy storage of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station (i.e., the second base station of the instant application) and transmit the received information to a mobile terminal so that the mobile terminal can calculate a link energy consumption characteristic when the mobile terminal accesses the candidate base station according to the current energy story of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, the amount of data required to be transmitted by the terminal , and the optimal energy efficiency (see, Feng: Page 3 (Page 3 of the English translated)).
Regarding claim 2:
As discussed above, Nagasaka in view of Feng teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Feng further teaches wherein the renewable energy use rate is based on an actual value of the renewable energy use rate of the second base station at a time point of transmission of the handover response or a predicted value of the renewable energy use rate of the second base station after the time point of transmission of the handover response (see, Feng: Page 3 (Page 3 of the English translated), “receiving information affecting candidate base station access selection, and the information about the candidate base station access selection includes: a wireless link state, a minimum transmission rate, a maximum transmit power, a current energy storage of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, and a terminal. The amount of data that needs to be transferred”).
Regarding claim 3:
As discussed above, Nagasaka in view of Feng teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Feng further teaches wherein the user terminal is configured to control data transmission based on the renewable energy use rate or the data transmission control command after handover to the second base station (see, Feng: Page 3 (Page 3 of the English translated), “calculating a link energy consumption characteristic when the terminal accesses the candidate base station according to the current energy storage of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, the amount of data required to be transmitted by the terminal, and the optimal energy efficiency”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Nagasaka in combination of the teachings of Feng in order for a mobile terminal to calculate a link energy consumption characteristic when the mobile terminal accesses the candidate base station according to the current energy story of the renewable energy-powered candidate base station, the amount of data required to be transmitted by the terminal , and the optimal energy efficiency (see, Feng: Page 3 (Page 3 of the English translated)).
Regarding claim 5:
Claim 5 is directed towards a base station (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, eNB 200-1 (CELL 250-1)) comprising a controller (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 3, eNB 200, Memory 230 and Processor 240; para. [0052], “The memory 230 and the processor 240 constitute a controller.”) configured to perform the features of the first base station in claim 1. Therefore, claim 5 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6:
Claim 6 is directed towards the base station according to claim 5 that is further limited to similar features to claim 2. Therefore, claim 6 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 7:
As discussed above, Nagasaka in view of Feng teaches all limitations in claim 5.
Nagasaka in view of Feng further teaches wherein the controller (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 3, eNB 200, Memory 230 and Processor 240) is configured to transmit the renewable energy use rate to the user terminal by including the renewable energy use rate in at least one of a system information block (SIB), a response to an initial access request, and a connection setting notification (e.g., RRC Connection Configuration) (see, Nagasaka: Fig. 7, S107, “RRC CONN.RECONF.INCL. mobilityControlInformation”; para. [0102], “In step S107, the eNB 200-1 transmits, to the UE 100, RRC connection reestablishment information (RRC Conn.Reconf.) including mobility control information (mobilityControlinformation) by using the downlink radio resource assignment. The UE 100 receives the RRC connection reestablishment information.”; para. [0103], “The eNB 200-1 transmits information received from the eNB 200-2 in step S105, specifically, the radio resource assignment, the physics-related information, the timing information, and the power information, together with the RRC connection reestablishment information.”).
Regarding claim 11:
Claim 11 is directed towards a communication method that follows the same steps described in claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12:
Claim 12 recites the communication method which corresponds to the baser station of claim 5, and contains no additional limitations. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 5 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 8-10 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI-HAE YEA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3310. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI, 7am-3pm, ET.
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, SUJOY K KUNDU can be reached on (571) 272-8586. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/JI-HAE YEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471