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 .
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.
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.
1. Claims 1-3, 6-7, 10-11, 26-28, 31-32, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Latheef et al (2020/0351735) in view of Sang et al (2018/0279182).
Regarding claims 1, 26 and 53. Latheff teaches a program, method and a terminal (figure 1, 0051-0053 – UE comprises processor, program and memory and transceiver), comprising a comprising a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and one or more programs stored in the memory, wherein the processor is configured to execute the one or more programs to:
acquire, through the communication interface, at least one handover command, the at least one handover command comprising at least one of a first handover command, a second handover command, and a conditional handover (CHO) command (figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO, figure 4B, 0098-0100 – the source BS has two target cells prepared for HO – one is the target cell (TgNB-2) based on normal handover preparation (e.g., first HO command) and the other is the target cell (TgNB-1) based on CHO preparation (e.g., second HO command based on CHO)), the first handover command being indicated through layer 1 signaling or layer 2 signaling, and the second handover command being indicated through layer 3 signaling;
determine a handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command (figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO, figure 4B, 0098-0100 – the source BS has two target cells prepared for HO – one is the target cell (TgNB-2) based on normal handover preparation (e.g., first HO command) and the other is the target cell (TgNB-1) based on CHO preparation (e.g., second HO command based on CHO)); and
perform cell handover according to the handover command to be preferentially executed (figure 4A, 0097 – at operation S428a, the RAN handover completion has occurred. figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO).
Latheef does not teach the first handover command being indicated through layer 1 signaling or layer 2 signaling, and the second handover command being indicated through layer 3 signaling
Sang teaches L1/L2/L3 mixed handover where the HO command comprises at least one of MAC CEs, DCI, and an encapsulated L3 RRC message (0005, 0081, figure 3 and paragraph 0085 – at step 325, the UE 305, the source DU 310, the target DU 315, and the CU 320 perform pre-configuration for L2 mobility. The preconfiguration comprises dynamic L3 RRC signaling, dynamic L2 signaling, dynamic selection of the mobility scheme, or statically-programmed policies or parameters. At step330, the source DU transmits to the UE an L2 measurement control message using L1 signaling or L2 signaling. The L2 measurement control message is functionally similar to an L3 RRC connection reconfiguration message. Figure 4, 0095 – as shown at steps 413-453 implementing L2 signaling to perform handover. Alternatively, the message sequence diagram 400 uses only L2 signaling or L1 signaling to perform handover … Alternatively, the message sequence diagram 400 implements L1, L2, or L3 signaling in a hybrid L2 and L3 UL mobility. Figure 6, 0106 – steps 633-645 may implement L2 signaling using encapsulated L3 RRC messages. However, at least steps 613-617, 633, and 647-655 may also implement L2 signaling where the L2 signaling may include L2 messages converted from L3 RRC signaling … the source DU and target DU may serve as proxies that perform L1 or L2 signaling (e.g., first handover command via L1 or L2) with encapsulated or converted L3 RRC message from the CUs (e.g., second handover command via L3). 0107 – The DUs may relay dynamic L3 RRC signaling between UEs and CUs or may use mixed L3 signaling with the CU and L1 or L2 signaling with the UEs). The CU may implement PDCP and L3 RRC functions and each DU may implement L1/L2 message function (0073) and L2 processing is faster than L3 processing because L2 processing uses lower-layer packet processing (0078, 0083).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef to incorporate the method of hybrid layer mobility as taught by Sang thereby providing for substantial improvement to for 5G/New Radio networks (Sang at 0111).
Regarding claims 2 and 27. Latheef does not teach the first handover command is a handover command triggered by a distributed unit (DU) in a network device based on a measurement result of layer 1 or layer 2; and the second handover command is a handover command triggered by a centralized unit (CU) in the network device based on a measurement report of layer 3 or cell load.
Sang teaches L1/L2/L3 mixed handover where the HO command comprises at least one of MAC CEs, DCI, and an encapsulated L3 RRC message (0005 – the CU triggers second handover command, 0081, figure 3 and paragraph 0085 – at step 325, the UE 305, the source DU 310, the target DU 315, and the CU 320 perform pre-configuration for L2 mobility. The preconfiguration comprises dynamic L3 RRC signaling, dynamic L2 signaling, dynamic selection of the mobility scheme, or statically-programmed policies or parameters. At step330, the source DU transmits to the UE an L2 measurement control message using L1 signaling or L2 signaling. The L2 measurement control message is functionally similar to an L3 RRC connection reconfiguration message. 0086 – at step 335, an L2 trigger for an inter-DU handover occurs at the UE. At step 340, the UE transmits an L2 measurement report to the source DU. Figure 4, 0095 – as shown at steps 413-453 implementing L2 signaling to perform handover. Alternatively, the message sequence diagram 400 uses only L2 signaling or L1 signaling to perform handover … Alternatively, the message sequence diagram 400 implements L1, L2, or L3 signaling in a hybrid L2 and L3 UL mobility. Figure 6, 0100-0102, UE transmits L3 trigger for inter-DU handover. Figure 6, 0106 – steps 633-645 may implement L2 signaling using encapsulated L3 RRC messages. However, at least steps 613-617, 633, and 647-655 may also implement L2 signaling where the L2 signaling may include L2 messages converted from L3 RRC signaling … the source DU and target DU may serve as proxies that perform L1 or L2 signaling (e.g., first handover command via L1 or L2) with encapsulated or converted L3 RRC message from the CUs (e.g., second handover command via L3). 0107 – The DUs may relay dynamic L3 RRC signaling between UEs and CUs or may use mixed L3 signaling with the CU and L1 or L2 signaling with the UEs). The CU may implement PDCP and L3 RRC functions and each DU may implement L1/L2 message function (0073) and L2 processing is faster than L3 processing because L2 processing uses lower-layer packet processing (0078, 0083).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef to incorporate the method of hybrid layer mobility as taught by Sang thereby enabling UE handover between Dus using L1/L2 layer, as well as, enabling UE handover controlled by the UE using L3 layer thereby providing for substantial improvement to for 5G/New Radio networks (Sang at 0111).
Regarding claims 3 and 28. Latheef teaches wherein when the at least one handover command comprises the first handover command and the second handover command, determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, one of the at least one handover command as the handover command to be preferentially executed according to a protocol (figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO (e.g., the protocol specifies that the first normal handover command is the handover command to be preferentially executed)); or
selecting randomly or automatically, by the terminal, one of the at least one handover command as the handover command to be preferentially executed; or
selecting preferentially, by the terminal, one of the at least one handover command as the handover command to be preferentially executed.
Regarding claims 6 and 31. Latheef teaches wherein when the at least one handover command comprises the first handover command and the second handover command, determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed according to a measurement result of a candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command and a measurement result of a candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command (figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO, figure 4B, 0098-0100 – the source BS has two target cells prepared for HO – one is the target cell (TgNB-2) based on normal handover preparation (e.g., first HO command) and the other is the target cell (TgNB-1) based on CHO preparation (e.g., second HO command based on CHO)).
Regarding claims 7 and 32. Latheef teaches wherein determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the measurement result of the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command and the measurement result of the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the first handover command, when the signal quality of the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command is higher than the signal quality of the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command; or
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the second handover command, when the signal quality of the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command is higher than the signal quality of the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command ([0107] In order to overcome this, it is necessary to instill the UE (100) with some intelligence in decision making towards CHO execution. This can be done by introducing the requirement for satisfying multiple reporting configurations by the UE (100). For example, the UE (100) may be configured with event A3 with trigger quantity set to RSRP. When A3 is successfully satisfied by the UE (100), it is aware that the signal strength of the neighbor cell is better than the serving cell/suitable to serve the UE (100). However, it is not aware of the load and quality of the neighbor cell. To make the UE (100) capable of making an intelligent evaluation of the target cell, the base station (200) can configure event A4 with trigger quantity set to RSRQ. The RSRQ measurement provides an indication of the load on the target cell. Together, the RSRP based A3 indicates that the target cell signal conditions are good and RSRQ based A4 indicates the load on the target cell is acceptable. Therefore, the handover is made more reliable than the case of the CHO execution based on single condition/trigger).
Regarding claim 10. Latheef teaches wherein when the at least one handover command comprises the first handover command and the CHO command, acquiring the at least one handover command comprises:
acquiring, by the terminal, a configuration parameter for at least one candidate cell and a handover execution condition corresponding to the at least one candidate cell from a network device; and
determining from the at least one candidate cell, by the terminal, a candidate cell that meets the handover execution condition as a candidate target cell to be switched to, wherein a configuration parameter corresponding to the candidate target cell is the CHO command; and acquiring, by the terminal, the first handover command from the network device ([0011] In accordance with an aspect of the disclosure, a method for executing a handover by a terminal in a wireless communication system is provided. The method includes receiving a radio resource control (RRC) message including a configuration for conditional handover (CHO), wherein the configuration for CHO includes an execution condition associated with a candidate target cell, the execution condition including a first measurement identity (ID) and a second measurement ID, determining whether triggering condition for the first measurement ID and the second measurement ID are fulfilled for the candidate target cell, and executing the CHO to the candidate target cell in case that the triggering conditions are fulfilled.
[0012] In accordance with another aspect of the disclosure, a method performed by a base station in a wireless communication system is provided. The method includes transmitting, to a terminal, a radio resource control (RRC) message including a configuration for conditional handover (CHO), wherein the configuration for CHO includes an execution condition associated with a candidate target cell, the execution condition including a first measurement identity (ID) and a second measurement ID, receiving, from the terminal, a measurement report in case that triggering condition for the first measurement ID and the second measurement ID are fulfilled for the candidate target cell, and transmitting, to the candidate target cell, a handover request message in response to the measurement report.
[0013] In accordance with another aspect of the disclosure, a terminal in a wireless communication system is provided. The terminal includes a transceiver configured to transmit and receive a signal, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and configured to receive a radio resource control (RRC) message including a configuration for conditional handover (CHO), wherein the configuration for CHO includes an execution condition associated with a candidate target cell, the execution condition including a first measurement identity (ID) and a second measurement ID, determine whether triggering condition for the first measurement ID and the second measurement ID are fulfilled for the candidate target cell, and execute the CHO to the candidate target cell in case that the triggering conditions are fulfilled.
[0014] In accordance with another aspect of the disclosure, a base station in a wireless communication system is provided. The base station includes a transceiver configured to transmit and receive a signal, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and configured to transmit, to a terminal, a radio resource control (RRC) message including a configuration for conditional handover (CHO), wherein the configuration for CHO includes an execution condition associated with a candidate target cell, the execution condition including a first measurement identity (ID) and a second measurement ID, receive, from the terminal, a measurement report in case that triggering condition for the first measurement ID and the second measurement ID are fulfilled for the candidate target cell, and transmit, to the candidate target cell, a handover request message in response to the measurement report.
Regarding claim 11. Latheef teaches wherein determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises: selecting preferentially, by the terminal, the first handover command as the handover command to be preferentially executed (figure 4A, 0093-0094 – BS configures UE with normal HO command and CHO command wherein normal HO has higher priority than CHO, figure 4B, 0098-0100 – the source BS has two target cells prepared for HO – one is the target cell (TgNB-2) based on normal handover preparation (e.g., first HO command) and the other is the target cell (TgNB-1) based on CHO preparation (e.g., second HO command based on CHO)).
2. Claims 4-5 and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Latheef in view of Sang further in view of Xu et al (2021/0368400).
Regarding claims 4 and 29. Latheef in view of Sang do not teach wherein when the at least one handover command comprises the first handover command and the second handover command, determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, according to a handover type of the second handover command, the handover command to be preferentially executed, the handover type of the second handover command comprising one of: inter-frequency handover, intra-frequency handover, or inter-radio access technology handover.
Xu teaches configuring handover commands for L1, L2 and L3 (0098, 0131, 0138). The network sends cell change command to the UE in L1/L2, e.g., instead of in L3, according to some embodiments (0143). Such embodiments may be applied to both intra-frequency and inter-frequency handover (0092). The network configures triggers for handover and frequencies of the serving cell may be prioritized (0102-0103 – for example the threshold change may be smaller for cells within the set verses cells outside of the set. In other words, a smaller difference in quality may trigger an intra-cell change than an inter-cell change). Inter-cell set change thresholds may be different (e.g., higher than) intra-cell set change thresholds (0107). Cell change controlled by the network may be based on UE measurement reports (MR). For example, a UE may provide MR (e.g., of L1/L3 measurements) and the Network responds with a command, e.g., indicating a target cell (0109, 0113). The L2 configuration information may be common to all the cells and L1 configuration information may be cell specific (0136). In some embodiments, another exemplary signaling structure may include common L3 configurations, different L2 configurations (or common L2 configuration+delta configuration for some/all cells), and different L1 configuration (or common L1 configuration+delta configuration for some/all cells) (0138).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef in view of Sang to provide handoff commands with threshold values as taught by Xu in order to enable the network to prioritize frequency of the serving cell when conducting handovers for inter-cell change and intra-cell change.
Regarding claim 5 and 30. Latheef in view of Sang do not teach wherein determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the handover type of the second handover command comprises: determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the second handover command, when the handover type of the second handover command is the inter- frequency handover or the inter-radio access technology handover; or determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the first handover command, when the handover type of the second handover command is the intra- frequency handover.
Xu teaches configuring handover commands for L1, L2 and L3 (0098, 0131, 0138). The network sends cell change command to the UE in L1/L2, e.g., instead of in L3, according to some embodiments (0143). Such embodiments may be applied to both intra-frequency and inter-frequency handover (0092). The network configures triggers for handover and frequencies of the serving cell may be prioritized (0102-0103 – for example the threshold change may be smaller for cells within the set verses cells outside of the set. In other words, a smaller difference in quality may trigger an intra-cell change than an inter-cell change). Inter-cell set change thresholds may be different (e.g., higher than) intra-cell set change thresholds (0107). Cell change controlled by the network may be based on UE measurement reports (MR). For example, a UE may provide MR (e.g., of L1/L3 measurements) and the Network responds with a command, e.g., indicating a target cell (0109, 0113). The L2 configuration information may be common to all the cells and L1 configuration information may be cell specific (0136). In some embodiments, another exemplary signaling structure may include common L3 configurations, different L2 configurations (or common L2 configuration+delta configuration for some/all cells), and different L1 configuration (or common L1 configuration+delta configuration for some/all cells) (0138).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef in view of Sang to provide handoff commands with threshold values as taught by Xu in order to enable the network to prioritize frequency of the serving cell when conducting handovers for inter-cell change and intra-cell change.
3. Claims 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Latheef in view of Sang further in view of Chen et al (2020/0351694).
Regarding claim 8. Latheef in view of Sang do not teach wherein when the at least one handover command comprises the first handover command and the second handover command, determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed according to whether a candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command is the same as a candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command.
Chen teaches at [0166] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command for the target cell is executed. In some other implementations, if two or more target cells have the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell based on its own decision. For example, if multiple NR cells are triggered in the CHO execution, the UE may determine which NR cell to select based on UE implementation. For example, the UE may consider the beams and/or the beam quality to select one of the triggered NR cells for the CHO execution. In some implementations, when a trigger condition of a CHO command is fulfilled and there are multiple target cells indicated in the CHO command, the UE may perform a target cell selection procedure in which the UE may select one of the target cells and execute the CHO command to connect to the selected target cell. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed by the UE based on a given cell priority of each candidate target cell indicated in the CHO command. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on a frequency priority. The UE may receive the frequency priority from dedicated signaling or system information. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on cell loading information or other information from the NW or collected by the UE. In some implementations, S-criterion (e.g., for cell selection) and/or R-criteria (e.g., for cell reselection) may be applied to the CHO target cell selection.
Chen at [0168] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command of the target cell is executed. If there are more than one target cell with the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell with the highest signal quality to connect.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef in view of Sang to provide CHO with different trigger conditions, as well as, priority information to the UE as taught by Chen in order to improve 5G mobility (Chen at 0005)..
Regarding claim 9. Latheef in view of Sang do not teach wherein determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to whether the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command is the same as the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command comprises:
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the second handover command, when the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command is different from the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command; or
determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed as the first handover command, when the candidate target cell indicated by the first handover command is the same as the candidate target cell indicated by the second handover command.
Chen teaches at [0166] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command for the target cell is executed. In some other implementations, if two or more target cells have the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell based on its own decision. For example, if multiple NR cells are triggered in the CHO execution, the UE may determine which NR cell to select based on UE implementation. For example, the UE may consider the beams and/or the beam quality to select one of the triggered NR cells for the CHO execution. In some implementations, when a trigger condition of a CHO command is fulfilled and there are multiple target cells indicated in the CHO command, the UE may perform a target cell selection procedure in which the UE may select one of the target cells and execute the CHO command to connect to the selected target cell. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed by the UE based on a given cell priority of each candidate target cell indicated in the CHO command. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on a frequency priority. The UE may receive the frequency priority from dedicated signaling or system information. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on cell loading information or other information from the NW or collected by the UE. In some implementations, S-criterion (e.g., for cell selection) and/or R-criteria (e.g., for cell reselection) may be applied to the CHO target cell selection.
Chen at [0168] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command of the target cell is executed. If there are more than one target cell with the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell with the highest signal quality to connect.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef in view of Sang to provide CHO with different trigger conditions, as well as, priority information to the UE as taught by Chen in order to improve 5G mobility (Chen at 0005).
Regarding claim 12. Latheef in view of Sang do not teach wherein determining the handover command to be preferentially executed according to the at least one handover command comprises: determining, by the terminal, the handover command to be preferentially executed according to a handover type of the CHO command, wherein the handover type of the CHO command comprises inter-frequency handover or intra-frequency handover.
Chen at [0038] In some implementations, a CHO command may include at least one of the following: a trigger condition, a leaving condition, a target cell ID, a carrier frequency (e.g., NR-Absolute Radio Frequency Channel Number (ARFCN)) of the target cell, a life time of the CHO, a handover priority (e.g., handover priority, or CHO command priority), a CHO command ID (or “CHO configuration ID”), a dedicated Random Access Channel (RACH) configuration(s), and a common RACH configuration(s) (e.g., for optionally providing resources for a contention-free random access).
Chen at [0041] The IE MeasConfig may specify the measurements to be performed by the UE, which may cover at least one of intra-frequency, inter-frequency and inter-RAT mobility. The IE MeasConfig may further include the configuration of measurement gaps. An example Text Proposal (TP) of the measurement configuration (e.g., IE MeasConfig) is shown in Table 1.
Chen teaches at [0166] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command for the target cell is executed. In some other implementations, if two or more target cells have the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell based on its own decision. For example, if multiple NR cells are triggered in the CHO execution, the UE may determine which NR cell to select based on UE implementation. For example, the UE may consider the beams and/or the beam quality to select one of the triggered NR cells for the CHO execution. In some implementations, when a trigger condition of a CHO command is fulfilled and there are multiple target cells indicated in the CHO command, the UE may perform a target cell selection procedure in which the UE may select one of the target cells and execute the CHO command to connect to the selected target cell. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed by the UE based on a given cell priority of each candidate target cell indicated in the CHO command. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on a frequency priority. The UE may receive the frequency priority from dedicated signaling or system information. In some implementations, the target cell selection procedure may be performed based on cell loading information or other information from the NW or collected by the UE. In some implementations, S-criterion (e.g., for cell selection) and/or R-criteria (e.g., for cell reselection) may be applied to the CHO target cell selection.
Chen at [0168] In some implementations, if multiple target cells indicated in one or more CHO commands fulfill the associated trigger condition(s), the UE may choose the target cell with the highest cell priority to connect to when the CHO command of the target cell is executed. If there are more than one target cell with the same highest cell priority and the associated trigger condition(s) is fulfilled, the UE may choose the target cell with the highest signal quality to connect.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Latheef in view of Sang to provide CHO with different trigger conditions, as well as, priority information to the UE as taught by Chen in order to improve 5G mobility (Chen at 0005).
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
---(2018/0199328) Sang et al teaches L1/L2/L3 handover commands (figure 11A – step 1 wherein UE receives RRC connection Reconfiguration regarding L1/L2/L3).
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARRY W TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-7509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 7-5.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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.
/BARRY W TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646