DETAILED ACTION
In response to communication filed on 5/5/2026.
Claims 16-30 are pending.
Claims 16-30 are rejected.
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 Amendments
This communication is in response to Applicant’s reply filed under 3 CFR 1.111 on 5/5/2026. Claims 16-30 remain pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 16-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christoffersson et al. (US Pub. 2023/0147090)(C1 hereafter) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub. 2018/0255473)(K1 hereafter).
Regarding claims 16 and 23, C1 teaches a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU)(i.e. UE)[refer Fig. 2; 300a] comprising:
a processor [refer Fig. 11; 310][paragraph 0146] configured to:
receive configuration information [paragraph 0055], the configuration information comprises a set of measurement reporting conditions (i.e. trigger)[paragraph 0061];
receive a link quality indication from a second WTRU [refer Fig. 2; 200d], the link quality indication is associated with a link between the second WTRU and a network [paragraph 0080];
perform a measurement [paragraph 0074];
determine that the selected measurement reporting condition [paragraph 0076] is satisfied based on the performed measurement [paragraph 0077]; and
send, based on a determination that the measurement reporting condition is satisfied [paragraph 0077], a measurement report to the network [paragraph 0078].
However, C1 fails to disclose the configuration information comprises a set of measurement reporting conditions, and each measurement reporting condition in the set of measurement reporting conditions is associated with a respective backhaul link quality (i.e. trigger) and selecting a measurement reporting condition from the set of measurement reporting conditions based on the link quality indication and the respective backhaul link qualities.
K1 discloses that a terminal receives a measurement configuration from a base station [paragraph 0067] in which the configuration comprises of a measurement identity that links more than one measurement object to a reporting configuration, allowing for a report to indicate a specific measurement object for a measurement result to be triggered [paragraph 0071], a reporting condition consisting of a trigger quantity can be RSSI, channel utilization and backhaul rates (i.e. backhaul link quality)[paragraph 0201].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 for obtaining backhaul link quality for initiating measurement reporting [refer C1; Abstract] to incorporate multiple triggering events for measurement reporting as taught by K1 [refer K1; paragraph 0009]. One would be motivated to do so to prevent unnecessary measurement result reporting [refer K1; paragraph 0018].
Regarding claims 17 and 24, C1 in view of K1 teaches the respective backhaul link quality is a respective backhaul link quality value [paragraph 0060].
Regarding claim 18, C1 teaches the measurement [paragraph 0076] is performed based on measurement information indicated by the configuration information [paragraph 0073].
Regarding claim 19, C1 teaches the selected measurement reporting condition (i.e. triggered mobility measurement)[paragraph 0073] is associated with a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold, a reference signal received quality (RSRQ) threshold, or a received signal to noise indicator (RSNI) (i.e. SINR) threshold [paragraph 0076].
Regarding claim 20, C1 teaches the link quality indication is associated with a radio measurement [paragraph 0080], the radio measurement is a reference signal received power (RSRP), a reference signal received quality (RSRQ), or a received signal to noise indicator (RSNI)(i.e. SINR)[paragraph 0043].
Regarding claim 21, C1 fails to disclose the link quality indication is associated with a load condition of the link between the second WTRU and the network.
K1 discloses that trigger quantities for the reporting of a measurement can include wireless channel information and load information, which includes utilization and station count [paragraph 0011].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 to incorporate multiple triggering events for measurement reporting as taught by K1 [refer K1; paragraph 0009]. One would be motivated to do so to prevent unnecessary measurement result reporting [refer K1; paragraph 0018].
Regarding claims 22 and 27, C1 teaches the performed measurement is associated with a neighbor link and a link between the first WTRU and the second WTRU [paragraph 0055], and the neighbor link is a link between the first WTRU and a third WTRU or a link between the first WTRU and the network [refer Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 25, C1 teaches the measurement [paragraph 0076] is performed based on measurement information indicated by the configuration information [paragraph 0073].
However, C1 fails to disclose the link quality indication is associated with a load condition of the link between the second WTRU and the network.
K1 discloses that trigger quantities for the reporting of a measurement can include wireless channel information and load information, which includes utilization and station count [paragraph 0011].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 to incorporate multiple triggering events for measurement reporting as taught by K1 [refer K1; paragraph 0009]. One would be motivated to do so to prevent unnecessary measurement result reporting [refer K1; paragraph 0018].
Regarding claim 26, C1 teaches the selected measurement reporting condition (i.e. triggered mobility measurement)[paragraph 0073] is associated with a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold, a reference signal received quality (RSRQ) threshold, or a received signal to noise indicator (RSNI) (i.e. SINR) threshold [paragraph 0076], the link quality indication is associated with a radio measurement [paragraph 0080], and the radio measurement is an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSNI [paragraph 0043].
Claims 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over C1 in view Sebire et al. (US Pub. 2012/0295606)(S1 hereafter).
Regarding claim 28, C1 teaches a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (i.e. UE)[refer Fig. 2; 300a] comprising:
a processor [refer Fig. 11; 310][paragraph 0146] configured to:
receive configuration information [paragraph 0055], the configuration information indicates a measurement reporting condition (i.e. trigger)[paragraph 0061];
receive a link quality indication from a second WTRU [refer Fig. 2; 200d], the link quality indication is associated with a link between the second WTRU and a network [paragraph 0080];
perform a measurement [paragraph 0074];
determine that the measurement reporting condition is satisfied based on the performed measurement (upon having performed measurements, the measurements are reported to the network node (i.e. reporting condition being to measure mobility measurements))[paragraph 0077]; and
send, based on a determination that the measurement reporting condition is satisfied (i.e. measurements have been made regarding qualities [paragraph 0076], a measurement report to the network (upon having performed the measurements (i.e. the condition is satisfied), the measurements are then reported [paragraph 0077], the UE sends the report to the network node [paragraph 0078]).
However, C1 fails to disclose determine a scaled measurement reporting condition, the scaled measurement reporting condition is determined based on applying a scaling factor to the measurement reporting condition, and the scaling factor is associated with the link quality indication, the scaled measurement reporting condition being determined as satisfied.
S1, in the field of measurement reporting based upon signal level and quality for a cell (i.e. link quality) [paragraph 0026], discloses that a base station may send to a UE measurement reporting that should be initiated, including a reporting threshold (i.e. condition), the message also indicating whether a scaling factor should be used by the user equipment to scale measured values [paragraph 0061], the scaling factor is used on measured quantities [paragraph 0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 for reporting measurements of various qualities [refer C1; paragraph 0076] to incorporate a reporting threshold that uses one or more scaling factors to scale the one or more measurements as taught by S1. One would be motivated to do so to normalize dynamic ranges for different types of measurement values [refer S1; paragraph 0043].
Regarding claim 29, C1 fails to disclose that the scaling factor is received from the second WTRU or the network.
S1, in the field of measurement reporting based upon signal level and quality for a cell (i.e. link quality) [paragraph 0026], discloses that a base station may send to a UE measurement reporting that should be initiated, including a reporting threshold (i.e. condition), the message also indicating whether a scaling factor should be used by the user equipment to scale measured values [paragraph 0061], the scaling factor is used on measured quantities [paragraph 0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 for reporting measurements of various qualities [refer C1; paragraph 0076] to incorporate a reporting threshold that uses one or more scaling factors to scale the one or more measurements as taught by S1. One would be motivated to do so to normalize dynamic ranges for different types of measurement values [refer S1; paragraph 0043].
Regarding claim 30, C1 fails to disclose determining the scaling factor based on the link quality indication.
S1, in the field of measurement reporting based upon signal level and quality for a cell (i.e. link quality) [paragraph 0026], discloses that a base station may send to a UE measurement reporting that should be initiated, including a reporting threshold (i.e. condition), the message also indicating whether a scaling factor should be used by the user equipment to scale measured values [paragraph 0061], the scaling factor is used on measured quantities [paragraph 0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of C1 for reporting measurements of various qualities [refer C1; paragraph 0076] to incorporate a reporting threshold that uses one or more scaling factors to scale the one or more measurements as taught by S1. One would be motivated to do so to normalize dynamic ranges for different types of measurement values [refer S1; paragraph 0043].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 16-27, applicant argues that the applied reference, K1, does not teach the claim limitation, namely, “select a measurement reporting condition from the set of measurement reporting conditions based on the link quality indication and the respective backhaul link qualities.”
In response to the above-mentioned argument, examiner respectively disagrees. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, to select a measurement reporting condition from a set of measurement reporting conditions based on a link quality indication and respective backhaul link qualities can be viewed as the received measurement configuration that identifies more than one measurement object to a reporting configuration as taught by K1 [refer K1; paragraph 0071], the reporting condition being at least one (i.e. more than one) backhaul rate [refer K1; paragraph 0201]. The disclosure of K1 allows for the identification of a plurality of various reporting conditions or triggers based upon particular values [refer K1; Abstract], which includes at least one (i.e. allowing for multiple or set of) backhaul rate [refer K1; paragraph 0201], which allows for support for multiple instances of reporting conditions, especially related to backhaul, since C1 is directed towards obtaining backhaul link quality [refer C1; paragraph 0051] and performing measurement of wireless links accordingly [refer C1; paragraph 0075].
In response to applicant's argument that K1 is silent as to selecting a measurement condition from the set of reporting conditions based on the link quality indication and the respective backhaul link qualities, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). With regards to the combined teachings of C1 in view of K1, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Regarding claims 28-30, applicant argues that the applied reference does not teach the claim limitation, namely, “determine a scaled measurement reporting condition.”
In response to the above-mentioned argument, examiner respectively disagrees. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, as required by MPEP 2111, to determine a scaled measurement reporting condition that is determined based on applying a scaling factor to a measurement reporting condition can viewed as setting a reporting threshold (i.e. the claimed scaled reporting condition) that uses a scaling factor accordingly to apply to measured values as taught by S1 [refer S1; paragraph 0057]. Without any further claim language that would further define the determined scaled reporting condition, this interpretation can be viewed as such.
With regards to the combined teachings of C1 in view of S1, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 RYAN C KAVLESKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3619. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-3pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 571-270-7191. 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.
Ryan Kavleski
/R.C.K./
Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights