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 10/07/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument that Li does not teach “continuing to store the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells after the switching,” the examiner respectfully disagrees. Li mentions in paragraphs 45, 46 and 75 that the configuration data is prestored for the cells. By pre-storing the configuration information, the handovers can be completed without the need to reacquire the configuration information. This implies that the configuration information would be stored and utilized when needed. This would include storing the configuration information after a handover, switch. In order to successfully perform the handover, the stored information will be used, paragraphs 46 and 76. Furthermore, it is noted that the configuration information is only updated as needed, paragraphs 55 and 82. This would imply that the configuration information is stored and then updated. This would mean that even after a switch, the configuration information is still known about all of the cells. This is further insinuated by stating the latest information of configuration information is what is always stored, paragraph 90. By only updating stored configuration information when necessary to ensure faster handovers, this would imply continually saving the configuration information. Therefore, Li does teach “continuing to store the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells after the switching.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “continuing” in claims 1 and 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “continuing” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. By defining something being stored continually, it is unclear how long this storage could be. Continue to store an item could mean for 1 small instance to indefinitely and everything in between. Therefore, there is no definite recitation of how long the data is stored.
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 (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 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) 1-4, 6, 7, 9-15, 17, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 2020/0314812) in view of Li (US 2023/0107526).
Regarding Claim 1, Xu ‘812 teaches a method (Paragraph 245) comprising:
receiving, from a first serving cell, one or more operational mode configurations for a plurality of cells (Paragraph 56, wherein there are configuration parameters of the cell);
determining first beam management information for the plurality of cells (Paragraph 109, wherein there is beam management information);
causing transmission, to the first serving cell, of a first beam management report comprising the first beam management information for the plurality of cells (Paragraph 110, wherein the report is transmitted);
receiving, from the first serving cell, a switch indication comprising instructions to switch to a target beam of a target cell (Paragraph 239, wherein a handover request can be made);
switching from the first serving cell to the target beam of the target cell, wherein the target cell becomes a second serving cell (Paragraphs 185-189 and 235-243, wherein the handover occurs from the first cell to the target cell).
Xu ‘812 does not teach causing storage of the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells; and
continuing to store the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells after the switching.
Li does teach causing storage of the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells (Paragraphs 55 and 76, wherein the configuration information is stored for the cells); and
continuing to store the one or more operational mode configurations for the plurality of cells after the switching (Paragraphs 45, 46, 55, 75, 76, 82, and 90, wherein the data is prestored to allow for fast handovers to occur by accessing stored data for all cells. In addition, the cell configuration data is only updated when needed. This would imply continually storing data).
Xu ‘812 and Li are combinable because they both deal with handovers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu ‘812 with the teachings of Li for the purpose of reducing signal overhead and improving performance (Li: Paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 2, Xu ‘812 further teaches determining second beam management information for the plurality of cells (paragraph 109, wherein a report can be generated for each cell);
causing transmission, to the second serving cell, of a second beam management report comprising the second beam management information for the plurality of cells (Paragraph 110, wherein the report is transmitted);
Xu ‘812 does not teach causing storage of timing advance information for the first serving cell;
retrieving the one or more operational mode configurations and the timing advance information; and
switching, based on at least the timing advance information, from the second serving cell to the first serving cell.
Li does teach causing storage of timing advance information for the first serving cell (Paragraph 35, wherein the TA information is given);
retrieving the one or more operational mode configurations and the timing advance information (Paragraphs 35 and 46,wherein the configuration information and the TA information are provided); and
switching, based on at least the timing advance information, from the second serving cell to the first serving cell (Paragraph 35 and 46, wherein the handover is performed).
Xu ‘812 and Li are combinable because they both deal with handovers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu ‘812 with the teachings of Li for the purpose of reducing signal overhead and improving performance (Li: Paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 3, Xu ‘812 further teaches wherein switching from the first serving cell to the second serving cell comprises a random access channel-less handover (Paragraph 186, wherein TACH-less can be used).
Xu ‘812 does not teach wherein the stored timing advance information is used for switching from the second serving cell to the first serving cell.
Li does teach wherein the stored timing advance information is used for switching from the second serving cell to the first serving cell (Paragraph 35 and 46, wherein the handover is performed).
Xu ‘812 and Li are combinable because they both deal with handovers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu ‘812 with the teachings of Li for the purpose of reducing signal overhead and improving performance (Li: Paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 4, Li further teaches wherein the one or more operational mode configurations comprises one or more of a fast cell selection conditional handover configuration for each cell of the plurality of cells, the first beam management information, or the second beam management information (Paragraph 78, wherein the configuration information is used for fast cell handover).
Xu ‘812 and Li are combinable because they both deal with handovers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu ‘812 with the teachings of Li for the purpose of reducing signal overhead and improving performance (Li: Paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 6, Xu ‘812 further teaches wherein one or more of the first beam management report or the second beam management report comprise one or more of intracell or intercell beam management reporting associated with one or more cells of the plurality of cells (Paragraph 191, wherein there is a beam signal with the target cell).
Regarding Claim 7, Li further teaches wherein one or more of a user equipment, a network, a radio access network, a base station, or a cell store one or more of the one or more operational mode configurations, the first beam management information, the second beam management information, or the timing advance information for at least a respective cell of the plurality of cells (Paragraphs 55 and 76, wherein the configuration information is stored for the cells. This is stored in the UE).
Xu ‘812 and Li are combinable because they both deal with handovers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu ‘812 with the teachings of Li for the purpose of reducing signal overhead and improving performance (Li: Paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 9, Xu ‘812 further teaches wherein the switch indication comprises a medium access control element (Paragraphs 52 and 63, wherein the MAC configuration is utilized with the handover).
Regarding Claim 10, Xu ‘812 further teaches wherein the switching to the target beam of the target cell is dynamically caused by a trigger condition configured by the first serving cell or the second serving cell (Paragraph 185, wherein the handover can occur based on a trigger).
Regarding Claim 11, Xu ‘812 further teaches wherein the target cell is associated with a plurality of target beams (Paragraphs 187 and 188, wherein the target cell can utilize multiple beams).
Regarding Claim 12, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 13, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 14, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 3 above.
Regarding Claim 15, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 6 above.
Regarding Claim 18, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 7 above.
Regarding Claim 20, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 9 above.
Claim(s) 5, 8, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 2020/0314812) in view of Li (US 2023/0107526) further in view of Xu (US 2024/0014973).
Regarding Claim 5, Xu ‘812 in view of Li does not teach wherein one or more of the first beam management information or the second beam management information are generated based on reference signals transmitted by the plurality of cells, wherein the reference signals comprise synchronization signal block resource mapping.
Xu ‘973 teaches wherein one or more of the first beam management information or the second beam management information are generated based on reference signals transmitted by the plurality of cells, wherein the reference signals comprise synchronization signal block resource mapping (Paragraphs 121-124, 173, and 218, wherein the reference signals correspond to synchronization signal blocks that are mapped. These correspond to the beam information).
Xu ‘812 and Xu ‘973 are combinable because they both deal with configuration of UE.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu’ 812 with the teachings of Xu ‘973 for the purpose of improving transmission of the UE (Xu ‘973: Paragraph 4).
Regarding Claim 8, Xu ‘812 in view of Li does not teach wherein the plurality of cells comprises one or more of a neighboring cell of the first serving cell, a neighboring cell of the second serving cell, the first serving cell, or the second serving cell.
Xu ‘ 973 does teach wherein the plurality of cells comprises one or more of a neighboring cell of the first serving cell, a neighboring cell of the second serving cell, the first serving cell, or the second serving cell (Paragraphs 154, 180 and 225, wherein system information is in association with neighbor cells).
Xu ‘812 and Xu ‘973 are combinable because they both deal with configuration of UE.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Xu’ 812 with the teachings of Xu ‘973 for the purpose of improving transmission of the UE (Xu ‘973: Paragraph 4).
Regarding Claim 16, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 5 above.
Regarding Claim 19, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 8 above.
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 NICHOLAS PACHOL whose telephone number is (571)270-3433. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4.
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, George Eng can be reached at 571-272-7495. 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.
/NICHOLAS PACHOL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699