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 claims foreign priority to an Indian application, filed on 30 Jul 2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 57 and 58 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because the Specification fails to spell out the words that the acronym “MR” stands for. Spec., ¶72. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim 51 is 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 claims 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, “[t]he apparatus as in claim 43, further including a dedicated scheduling request resource.” As best the Examiner understands the described invention, the UE apparatus may send a scheduling request using a dedicated resource, but it does not include said resource. Spec., 18:24-25.
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 43-46, 48-50, and 59- 64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 20220007259).
Regarding claims 43 and 59, the second embodiment of Fujishiro explicitly teaches an apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to cause the apparatus at least to execute a method, comprising:
receive, from the master network node, radio resource control reconfiguration data representing a radio resource control reconfiguration (Fujishiro, ¶¶109-110 – in step s202, UE receives a plurality of RRC configuration in a RRC reconfiguration message),
the radio resource control reconfiguration including a conditional fallback configuration linked to a master cell group radio link failure event with the master network node. Fujishiro, ¶129 (when a role change between base stations 200A and 200B occurs, the UE applies a standby RRC configuration received in step s202); Fujishiro, ¶¶101, 109, 118 (role change between base stations 200A and 200B is triggered when the MCG link experiences an RLF).
The second embodiment of Fujishiro does not explicitly teach “transmit, by a user equipment in a network, measurement data to a master network node serving the user equipment, the measurement data representing a measurement report.” However, the first embodiment of Fujishiro teaches UE 100 transmitting a measurement report to its MN, i.e. base station 200A. Fujishiro, ¶89. 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 enable the UE 100 in the second embodiment of Fujishiro, to transmit a measurement report to an MN, as taught by the first embodiment in figure 7, in order to provide the MN with information applicable to its measurement control function for mobility control and scheduling. Id. at ¶22; see also id. at ¶184 for mobility control.
Regarding claims 60 and 64, they are directed to the same invention as claims 43 and 59, but from the perspective of the MN, rather than the UE. Claims 60 and 64 are unpatentable for the same reasons provided for claims 43 and 59.
Regarding claim 44, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the radio resource control reconfiguration data includes conditional handover configuration data representing instructions for a conditional handover. Fujishiro, ¶92, 146 (conditional handover); Fujishiro, ¶177 (role change is a type of handover); Fujishiro, ¶129 (standby configuration is activated as a result of the role change).
Regarding claim 45, Fujishiro also teaches detect a master cell group radio link failure at the master network node; and in response to the detecting, apply the conditional fallback configuration. Fujishiro, ¶130 (UE activates standby configuration after transmitted the first message in s205, which includes M-RLF information).
Regarding claim 46, Fujishiro also teaches prior to applying the conditional fallback configuration, perform a measurement criteria verification operation on conditional fallback configuration measurements. Fujishiro, ¶¶108, 89, 118 (before applying the standby configuration triggered by the role change in step s207, the UE transmits a measurement report in s205 of figure 8).
Regarding claim 48, Fujishiro also teaches performing a handover from the master network node to a secondary network node serving the user equipment. Fujishiro, figure 8 (as a result of the role change in figure 8, base station 200B becomes the MN for UE 100); Fujishiro, ¶92, 146 (conditional handover); Fujishiro, ¶177 (role change is a type of handover).
Regarding claim 49, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the instructions include a reconfiguration of a current primary-secondary cell associated with the secondary network node as a primary cell associated with the master network node. Fujishiro, figure 8 and ¶¶177, 182 (as a result of role change, the previous SN [more precisely the PSCell] becomes the new MN).
Regarding claim 50, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the conditional fallback configuration includes reference signal received power measurement check performed on a secondary cell group associated with a secondary network node serving the user equipment. Fujishiro, ¶96 (RSRP is evaluated for each cell).
Regarding claim 61, Fujishiro also teaches generating the conditional fallback configuration with a current secondary network node serving the user equipment for a handover between the master network node and the secondary network node. Fujishiro, figure 8 and ¶125 (the role change request sent by MN 200A to SN 200B includes configuration information required for SN 200B to become an MN).
Regarding claim 62, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the radio resource control reconfiguration data further includes a conditional handover configuration for target cells. Fujishiro, ¶92, 146 (conditional handover); Fujishiro, ¶177 (role change is a type of handover); Fujishiro, ¶129 (standby configuration is activated as a result of the role change).
Regarding claim 63, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the conditional fallback configuration is mapped to a master cell group radio link failure event and is based on whether a target master cell group reference signal received power is greater than a threshold. Fujishiro, figure 8 (after MCG RLF is determined in steps s203-s205, the role change in s207 is initiated); Fujishiro, ¶¶96, 108 (RSRP is evaluated for each cell and a threshold is used to detect a MCG RLF).
Claim 51 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 20220007259) in view of Kim (US 20220338089).
Regarding claim 47, Fujishiro teaches the apparatus as in claim 45, but does not explicitly teach “prior to applying the conditional fallback configuration, stop evaluation of pending conditional handover configurations.” However, Kim teaches a UE that stops evaluating the conditional change of a PSCell before suspending all radio bearers for the SCG. Kim, ¶¶236, 240 and figure 16 (step s1640). 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 discontinue evaluation for a potential secondary cell change, as taught by Kim, prior to executing the role change, taught by Fujishiro, in order to maintain connection with the current SN so that the current SN can become the new MN.
Claim 51 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 20220007259) in view of Yi (US 20230023041).
Regarding claim 51, Fujishiro teaches the apparatus as in claim 43 and a standby configuration in which the current secondary node changes roles to become the new master node (Fujishiro, figure 8 – i.e. a “conditional fallback configuration” via a secondary node), but does not explicitly teach “a dedicated scheduling request resource configured to enable faster switching to the conditional fallback configuration . . .” However, Yi teaches dedicated SR resources used for indicating an RLF in either the first or second cell. Yi, ¶356. 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 use dedicated SR resources, as taught by Yi, when transmitting the RLF information, taught by Fujishiro, in order to enable faster recovery in response to a RLF. Yi, ¶369.
Claims 52-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 20220007259) in view of Yamada (US 20150215965).
Regarding claim 52, Fujishiro teaches the apparatus as in claim 43, but does not explicitly teach “wherein the conditional fallback configuration includes instructions to anchor radio bearers of a master cell group as radio bearers of a secondary cell group, the master cell group being associated with the master network node, the secondary cell group associated with a secondary network node serving the user equipment.” However, Yamada teaches remapping DRBs that were previously established on a MCG to a SCG. Yamada, ¶¶21, 207 and figure 11. 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 enable the UE taught by Fujishiro, to reconfigure MCG data bearers onto the SCG, as taught by Yamada, in order to utilize the radio resources of both the MCG and SCG efficiently. Yamada, ¶51.
Regarding claim 53, the combination of Fujishiro and Yamada also teaches wherein the instructions to anchor include instructions to route master data radio bearer representing the radio bearers of the master cell group via the secondary network node. Yamada, ¶188 (DRB2, which is originally of MCG 1155, is relocated to SCG 1157).
Regarding claim 54, the combination of Fujishiro and Yamada also teaches a condition reconfiguration for initiating a remapping of the radio bearers of the master cell group to the secondary cell group. Yamada, ¶¶190-191 (RRC Connection Reconfiguration message triggers the UE to apply the new radio resource configuration, which leads to MCG DRBs being remapped to SCG).
Regarding claim 55, the combination of Fujishiro and Yamada also teaches a remapping of the radio bearers of the secondary cell group to the radio bearers of the master cell group through the master network node once access to a primary cell is successful. Yamada, ¶¶197-198 (the RRC Connection Reconfiguration Complete message 1113 indicates a successful remapping of MCG DRBs to SCG and the transmission of Modification Complete message 1115).
Claim 56 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 20220007259) in view of Deenoo (US 20220394583).
Regarding claim 56, Fujishiro teaches the apparatus as in claim 43, wherein the conditional fallback configuration includes a required condition for fallback configuration (Fujishiro, ¶130 – message in s210 or another condition may be the trigger for the UE to start using the standby RRC configuration), but does not explicitly teach “in response to the required condition for fallback configuration being met, a Timing Advance timer is running at a secondary cell group associated with a secondary network node.” However, Deenoo teaches a timing advance timer associated with the SCG. Deenoo, ¶111. 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 run a timer, as taught by Deenoo, after receiving the message in s210, as taught by Fujishiro, in order to commence a new RACH procedure with SN at the expiration of the timer, which indicates that the standby SCG configuration was not successful. Deenoo, ¶¶111, 143.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes figure 6 of Nigam, which teaches switching to single connectivity after an RLF and paragraph 137 of Futaki, which teaches transferring a DRB from an MN to an SN.
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 email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03, which allows for written authorization via the USPTO electronic filing system or mail, but not via email). 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