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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
1. The application of Wantanabe et al. for the "RADIO BASE STATION AND RADIO COMMUNICATION METHOD" filed 01/25/2024 has been examined. This application is a National Stage entry of PCT/JP2021/027976, International Filing Date: 07/28/2021. The preliminary amendment filed 12/11/20254 has been entered and made of record. Claims 7-9 are pending in the present application.
2. The applicant should use this period for response to thoroughly and very closely proof read and review the whole of the application for correct correlation between reference numerals in the textual portion of the Specification and Drawings along with any minor spelling errors, general typographical errors, accuracy, assurance of proper use for Trademarks TM, and other legal symbols @, where required, and clarity of meaning in the Specification, Drawings, and specifically the claims (i.e., provide proper antecedent basis for “the'' and “said'' within each
claim). Minor typographical errors could render a Patent unenforceable and so the applicant is
strongly encouraged to aid in this endeavor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
4. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103 and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103.
5. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (US#11,778,527) in view of Deenoo et al. (US#12,262,275).
Regarding claim 7, the references disclose a system and method for conditional primary secondary cell addition or change, according to the essential features of the claim. Kumar et al. (US#11,778,527) discloses a radio base station comprising: a control unit that controls an execution of a procedure for an addition/change of a secondary cell (Figs. 10-11; Col. 40, lines 52-61 : the communications manager 1020 support wireless communication at a master node for performing various aspects of reporting for conditional primary secondary cell addition or change); a reception unit that receives a first message relating to the secondary cell from another base station (Figs. 10-11; Col. 40, lines 62-67 & Col. 41, lines 38-51: the receiver 1010 receives information configuration for a conditional procedure for changing or adding a primary secondary cell associated with a secondary node); and a transmission unit that transmits a second message including update information of an execution condition of the procedure for the addition/change to another base station when receiving the first message (Figs. 10-11; Col. 41, line 62 to Col. 42, line 26: the transmitter 1015 transmits information related to the conditional procedure, information related to the primary secondary cell, or both, from a second master node involved in the handover procedure after successful handover of the primary cell to the second master node).
However, Kumar reference does not disclose expressly wherein the second message includes information elements that distinguish between the execution condition and a conditional message of a radio resource control layer. In the same field of endeavor, Deenoo et al. (US#12,262,275) teaches in Some WTRUs may be capable of monitoring both conditional PSCell addition and/or change (CPAC) and conditional handover (CHO) trigger conditions, but may be configured to execute one configuration or reconfiguration (e.g., for CPAC or CHO) at a time (Col. 15, lines 4-27 & Col. 34, lines 54-67: distinguish between CPAC or CHO based on the indication).
One skilled in the art would have recognized the need for effectively and efficiently handling of conditional handover and conditional primary secondary cell change, and would have applied Deenoo’s RRCReconfig message for inter-node coordination between a MN and a target SN into Kumara’s handling of reporting for conditional primary secondary cell addition or change. Therefore, It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Deenoo’s conditional mobility with multi-connectivity into Kumar’s reporting for conditional primary secondary cell addition or change with the motivation being to provide a method and system for handling of conditional handover and conditional primary secondary cell change.
Regarding claim 8, it is method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 7 examined above. Therefore, claim 8 is analyzed and rejected as previously discussed in paragraph above with respect to claim 7.
Regarding claim 9, it is system claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 7 examined above. Therefore, claim 9 is analyzed and rejected as previously discussed in paragraph above with respect to claim 7.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The Eklof et al. (US#2023/0300691) is cited to show conditional configuration in a wireless communication network.
The Paladugu et al. (US#11,800,418) shows conditional procedures for adding and/or changing a secondary node (SN).
The Takeda et al. (US#2024/0089807) shows BS apparatus, terminal, control and computer medium that improve processing for changing connection destination.
The Da Silva et al. (US#2023/0060537) shows master node, secondary node UE, and methods performed in a communication network.
The Chen et al. (US#12,200,553) shows target cell ID for conditional handover and conditional PSCell addition or change.
The Wu (US#2016/0183151) shows method of handling simultaneous communications and related communication device.
The Wu (US#12,349,021) shows managing conditional configuration when a secondary cell is unavailable.
The Wu (US#2024/0236777) shows managing conditional secondary node change.
The Purkayastha et al. (US#12,262,254) shows handling of conditional handover and conditional primary secondary cell change.
The Hwang et al. (US#11,412,429) shows method for measurement report event operation and network signaling in UE autonomous handover.
The Xu et al. (US#2023/0103163) shows method and apparatus for modifying configuration related to conditional mobility in wireless communication system.
9. Applicant's future amendments need to comply with the requirements of MPEP § 714.02, MPEP § 2163.04 and MPEP § 2163.06.
"with respect to newly added or amended claims, applicant should show support in the original disclosure for the new or amended claims." See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 ("Applicant should * * * specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure."); and MPEP § 2163.04 ("If applicant amends the claims and points out where and/or how the originally filed disclosure supports the amendment(s), and the examiner finds that the disclosure does not reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the subject matter of the amendment at the time of the filing of the application, the examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims."). See In re Smith, 458 F.2d 1389, 1395, 173 USPQ 679, 683 (CCPA 1972) In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 262,191 USPQ at 96 (emphasis added). "The use of a confusing variety of terms for the same thing should not be permitted.
New claims and amendments to the claims already in the application should be scrutinized not only for new matter but also for new terminology. While an applicant is not limited to the nomenclature used in the application as filed, he or she should make appropriate amendment of the specification whenever this nomenclature is departed from by amendment of the claims so as to have clear support or antecedent basis in the specification for the new terms appearing in the claims. This is necessary in order to insure certainty in construing the claims in the light of the specification." Ex parte Kotler, 1901 C.D. 62, 95 O.G. 2684 (Comm'r Pat. 1901). See 37 CFR 1.75, MPEP § 608.01 (i) and § 1302.01.
Note that examiners should ensure that the terms and phrases used in claims presented late in prosecution of the application (including claims amended via an examiner's amendment) find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description, see 37 CFR 1,75(d)(1 ). If the examiner determines that the claims presented late in prosecution do not comply with 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the terms appearing in the claims provided no new matter is introduced."
"USPTO personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure." In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023,1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP § 2106. "
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. Phan whose telephone number is (571) 272-3149. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri from 6:00 to 3:00.
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, Chirag Shah, can be reached on (571) 272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
11. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have any questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at toll free 1-866-217-9197.
Mphan
01/17/2026
/MAN U PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477