DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application is the national stage application of an international application that was filed on 5 Jan 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements, submitted on 3 Jul 2023 and 5 Apr 2024, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The amendment to the disclosure overcomes the objection to the Specification provided in the Non-final Rejection.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the written description rejections, the Reply contends the objections are moot in light of the amendments to the claims. Reply, 9. The Reply fails to identify the portions of the disclosure that may support the claimed invention. The written description rejection identifies the two portions of the disclosure that may be what the claimed invention is directed towards, but these portions do not demonstrate possession of the claimed invention, as it is presently worded.
Regarding the anticipation rejections, the Reply seems to imply that the claim amendments overcome the cited prior art. Reply, 11. However, the RRC Reconfiguration message 1020 [the message carrying the report configuration] is received by the UE prior to handover at 1035. Non-final Act., 7 (citing Kim, figure 10).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 51-74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 51 recites, in part, “determining information included in a variable for the successful handover report.” Emphasis added. This limitation lacks antecedent basis within the disclosure. Because claim 51 is not an originally filed claim, it is considered new matter. Several portions of the Specification seem to have the successful handover report “in the variable.” Spec., e.g. 16:2, 16:30. However, a successful handover report cannot be construed as the claimed “information” because it is already recited in the claim limitation at issue. In other portions of the disclosure, “a UE variable” is described for “storing information to be included in the successful handover report.” Spec., 21:11-15. These portions seem to imply that the UE variable is a memory device that stores information. To be consistent with this section of the disclosure, the Applicant is encouraged to amend the limitation such that information is stored in the variable – i.e. “storing information
Claim 63 recites the same limitation cited in the previous paragraph for claim 51 and is unsupported for the same reasons provided for claim 51. Claim 63 is also unsupported for an additional reason. Claim 51 has a terminal device executing the limitation, while claim 63 has a network device executing the limitation. The disclosure does not seem to possess a network device that defines the information stored in a UE variable. Instead, it appears that a terminal device generates the handover report and thus the “information” of the report. The Examiner acknowledges that the disclosure does support a network device providing a “report configuration” to a terminal device. However, the report configuration does not appear to specify individual values in the handover report, but instead defines the triggers for when the terminal should generate the handover report. Spec., ¶¶64-65.
Claim 75 is unsupported for the same reasons provided for claim 51. All other claims are rejected due to their dependence on either claim 51 or 63.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 75 is 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. Claim 75 recite “the variable,” which lack antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 51, 53-56, 58, 60-63, 65-68, 70, and 72-75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20230262538).
Regarding claims 51 and 75, Kim teaches a method for a terminal device (Kim, e.g. UE 1005), comprising at least one memory; and at least one processor couple to the at least one memory, wherein the processor is configured to execute the method comprising:
receiving, from a first network device, a report configuration (Kim, ¶109 and figure 10 or ¶133 and figure 11 – in steps 1020 or 1105 – terminal receives handover configuration information from source base station),
wherein the report configuration indicates whether the terminal device generates a successful handover report for a handover of the terminal device to a target cell of a second network device (Kim, ¶¶101, 109 or ¶¶141-142 – handover configuration information includes conditions that must be satisfied to trigger a successful handover and when a particular target cell meets the condition, handover is triggered); and
determining information included in a variable for the successful handover report in a case where the report configuration indicates the terminal device generates the successful handover report (Kim, ¶¶110-113 or ¶¶136 and 138 - terminal stores information related to a handover, which is considered to be successful); see also id., figure 11 - steps 1155 and 1175 for sending the successful handover report), and
wherein the report configuration is carried in a message sent prior to an initiation of the handover. Kim, figure 10 (RRCReconfiguration message 1020 is received by UE prior to the condition for a CHO being met, which then initiates a handover at 1035).
Regarding claim 63, Kim teaches a method for a first network device (Kim, e.g. source gNB 1010), comprising:
sending, to a terminal device, a report configuration (Kim, ¶133 and figure 11 – in step 1105 –source base station sends handover configuration information to terminal),
wherein the report configuration indicates whether the terminal device generates a successful handover report for a handover of the terminal device to a target cell of a second network device (Kim, ¶¶101, 109 or ¶¶141-142 – handover configuration information includes conditions that must be satisfied to trigger a successful handover and when a particular target cell meets the condition, handover is triggered); and
determining information included in a variable for the successful handover report in a case where the report configuration indicates the terminal device generates the successful handover report (Kim, ¶¶110-113 or ¶¶136 and 138 - terminal stores information related to a handover, which is considered to be successful), and
wherein the report configuration is carried in a message sent prior to an initiation of the handover. Kim, figure 10 (RRCReconfiguration message 1020 is received by UE prior to the condition for a CHO being met, which then initiates a handover at 1035).
Regarding claims 53 and 65, Kim also teaches the second message is an RRC message. Kim, figure 10 (RRCReconfiguration message 1020)
Regarding claims 54 and 66, Kim also teaches the RRC message is an RRCReconfiguration message. Kim, figure 10 (RRCReconfiguration message 1020).
Regarding claims 55 and 67, Kim also teaches storing a successful handover information in the variable for the successful handover report. Kim, ¶¶110-113 (when a handover is successful, the terminal stores predetermined successful reporting information); see id. at ¶¶119-125 for different elements of the predetermined successful reporting information).
Regarding claims 56 and 68, Kim also teaches discarding the variable for the successful handover report after setting the successful handover report in a message for the first network device or the second network device. Kim, ¶¶130 and 149 (terminal removes the stored successful HO report after a predetermined time); see also id., figures 11 and 12 (HO reporting being sent, which necessitates its information being “set” in a message, before being deleted).
Regarding claims 58 and 70, Kim also teaches releasing the report configuration on a successful handover. Kim, ¶102 (terminal removes handover configuration information when handover has been successfully completed).
Regarding claims 60 and 72, Kim also teaches sending, to the first network device or the second network device, a third message including availability of the successful handover report. Kim, ¶149 and figure 12 (RRC message in step 1215 includes availability indicator of successful HO report).
Regarding claims 61 and 73, Kim also teaches the third message is an RRC message. Kim, ¶149 and figure 12 (RRCSetupComplete or RRCResumeComplete message in step 1215).
Regarding claims 62 and 74, Kim also teaches the third message is RRCReconfigurationComplete message, RRCSetupComplete message, RRCResumeComplete message, or RRCReestablishmentComplete message. Kim, ¶149 and figure 12 (RRCSetupComplete or RRCResumeComplete message in step 1215).
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.
Claims 57 and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (of record) in view of Wegmann (US 20180262935).
Regarding claims 57 and 69, Kim teaches the methods of claims 56 and 68 and discarding a stored HO report. Kim, ¶¶107, 149 (terminal retains the stored handover report for a predetermined amount of time). Kim does not explicitly teach retaining the report for “48 hours.” However, Wegmann requires a UE to store a report for at least 48 hours. Wegmann, ¶50. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to require 48 hours of storage, as taught by Wegmann, for the handover report, taught by Kim, in order to provide the network with amble time to retrieve the details of the handover.
Claims 59 and 71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (of record) in view of Lee (US 20170374574).
Regarding claims 59 and 71, Kim teaches the methods of claims 51 and 63 and removing configuration information. Kim, ¶102 (terminal removes handover configuration information when handover has been successfully completed). Kim does not explicitly teach removing the report configuration “during an RRC reestablishment procedure.” However, Lee teaches a UE logging measurements in accordance with a reporting configuration when an RRC connection is being reestablished. Lee, figure 12 (steps s1210 and s1222 – logging results based on configuration); Lee, ¶153 (RRC connection is reestablished in figure 12). The reporting configuration is ultimately deleted. Lee, ¶¶136, 138. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to remove configuration, as taught by Kim, during a RRC reestablishment procedure, as taught by Lee, in order to conserve memory resource by purging a configuration after an RRC connection has been used to report the information generated based on the configuration.
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 BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571)270-7514 and fax number is 571-270-8514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 for authorizing unsecure communication). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm EST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/Benjamin Lamont/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights