Detailed Action
1. The Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s communication, preliminary amendment, filed on 01/08/2025. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-8, 10-17 and 19-22 are currently pending in this Office Action.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. Applicant' s claim for entering National Stage of a 371 of international application which claims the benefit of provisional application as ADS filed on 01/30/2024 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 37 CFR 1.78 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 2-8 and 11-17 are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 2-8 depend on claim 19 and claims 11-17 depend on claim 20. Appropriate correction is required.
It should be kept in mind that a dependent claim may refer to any preceding independent claim. In general, applicant's sequence will not be changed. See MPEP § 608.01(n).
5. Claims 1 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: PCI and IAB shall describe what they stand for first before abbreviated, not to interfere with other terminologies. Appropriate correction is required.
See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
8. Claims 1-8, 10-17 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Santhanam et al. Pub. No.: US 2022/0022069 A1 in view of Luo et al. Pub. No.: US 2021/0160703 A1.
Claim 1
Santhanam discloses a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (UE or communication device in fig. 1-6), the method comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
610
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
receiving, from a network (110 BS in fig. 2 or see network side in fig. 1 and see par. 0041 & 0044), configuration information (405 of fig. 4 for receiving a measurement configuration at UE in fig. 1-4), wherein the configuration information includes at least one of:
information included in a first broadcast information from a first cell (405 in fig. 4 for indicating one or more frequency in the measurement configuration; frequency is broadcasted in in SYNC in fig. 3B could be detected as depicted in fig. 4A-B and see par. 0052); and
information included in a second broadcast information from a second cell, including at least one of a frequency layer of one or more neighboring cells and a PCI range of the one or more neighboring cells (this limitation is under alternative one of: see Markush claim in MPEP 2111); and
PNG
media_image2.png
648
508
media_image2.png
Greyscale
modifying a measurement procedure (increasing measurement periodicity in 426 in fig. 4A and 436 in fig. 4B and decreasing measurement periodicity in 428 in fig. 4A and 438 in fig. 4B) for performing measurements on the first cell or at least one of the one or more neighboring cells (see par. 0059 & 0071 for measuring cell and par. 0073 for measurement candidates).
Although Santhanam does not disclose: “determining, based on the configuration information, that at least one of the first cell and the neighboring cells belong to one or more mobile IAB node”, the claim limitations are considered obvious by the following rationales.
PNG
media_image3.png
624
382
media_image3.png
Greyscale
To address the obviousness of the claim limitations “determining, based on the configuration information, that at least one of the first cell and the neighboring cells belong to one or more mobile IAB node”, recall that based on the configuration information, i.e., one or more frequency in fig. 4 of Santhanam, Santhanam discloses UE for performing measurement based on the measurement time or the signal quality and adding the cells to the candidates (par. 0073 and fig. 4A-B). What’s more, Santhanam explains that a mobile BS 110 in fig. 1 may be stationary or may move (par. 0041). It means that the teaching from Santhanam discloses the addressing claim limitations except IAB node. Moving access node with backhaul link or with link to a backbone network is intrinsic feature in the wireless communication. It’s to note that claim does not specifically define what are required to be mobile IAB node. See MPEP 2111. If reasonably interpretation is given in light of specification, IAB node is a mobile network node or a mobile IAB node. In particular, Luo teaches a mobile access node (105-f in fig. 2, see mobile IAB node in par. 0083) and a device (605 in fig. 6) for supporting IAB node cell coverage adjustment (fig. 12).
Additionally, Luo particularly teaches information included in a second broadcast information (SIB in par. 0156) from a second cell (fig. 10-11 for relay node belonging to second cell), including at least one of a frequency layer of one or more neighboring cells (frequency spectrum band or BWP in par. 0094, 0097, 0105, 0116-0118) and a PCI range of the one or more neighboring cells (PCI, identifier for neighboring cells in par. 0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify cell measurements of Santhanam by providing LAB node cell coverage adjustment as taught in Luo. Such a modification would have provided a user equipment to measure a mobile IAB node coverage so that the interference between access nodes or between access nodes and UEs could be managed not to degrade the performance as suggested in par. 0004-0005 of Luo.
Claim 2
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein performing the measurements in a relaxed manner (searching for cells at frequency in fig. 4 of Santhanam) includes at least one of the following:
applying longer measurements periods (Santhanam, increasing measurement periodicity in 426 in fig. 4A and 436 in fig. 4A); and
reducing a number of measurement samples taken (Santhanam, decreasing measurement periodicity in 428 in fig. 4A and 438 in fig. 4B; and thus, the combined prior art meets the claim requirement).
Claim 3
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein applying different parameters for measurement values (Santhanam, fig. 4, see measurement factors or parameter in par. 0054) includes applying at least one of the following:
different time-to-trigger (TTT) values (time to trigger in par. 0083 of Santhanam); and
different hysteresis values (Santhanam, a threshold to start at time to trigger and may include hysteresis in par. 0083; and hence, the combined prior meets the claim condition).
Claim 4
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the starting of performing neighbor cell measurements occurs after a mobility state of the serving fist cell changes from moving to static (Santhanam, ; Luo, 105-f access node is moving state, and see mobile IAB node moving in par. 0083, 0133, 0137-0139 & 0146; see further evidence in high speed mobility in fig. 8-10 of Yang et al. Pub. No.: US 2018/0049078 A1; the combined prior art renders the claim obvious).
Claim 5
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the stopping of performing neighbor cell measurements occurs after a mobility state of the first cell changes from static to moving (Santhanam, mobile BS 110 of fig. 1 may be stationary or may move in par. 0041, one or more frequency for measuring or searching cells in fig. 4A-B, let’s consider one cell is moving away from UE, then UE will measure the moving cell’s signal strength as the weakest, no longer found in searching at the previous measured frequency; Luo, moving IAB in par. 0137-0139; accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the combined prior art to perform equally well to the claim).
Claim 6
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the starting of performing neighbor cell measurements occurs after a mobility state of the one or more neighboring cell changes from moving to static (Santhanam, measuring cells in fig. 4A-B, and see par. 0041, mobile BS 101 in fig. 1 may be stationary or may move, it means that the call may become stationary from moving; Luo, mobile IAB node may be moving as explained in par. 0137-139 or an IAB node may be stationary in par. 0083, 0137, 0140, 0142 & 0150; for these reasons, the combined prior art covers the claim’s condition).
Claim 7
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the stopping of performing neighbor cell measurements occurs after a mobility state of the one or more neighboring cell changes from static to moving (Santhanam, measuring cells in fig. 4A-B, and see par. 0041, mobile BS 101 in fig. 1 may be stationary or may move, it means that the call may become stationary from moving and measurement periodicity includes stopping cell search; Luo, mobile IAB node may be moving as explained in par. 0137-139 or an IAB node may be stationary in par. 0083, 0137, 0140, 0142 & 0150; for these reasons, the combined prior art covers the claim’s condition).
Claim 8
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the starting or stopping of performing neighbor cell measurements is based on a location of the WTRU (Santhanam, measuring cells in fig. 4A-B, and see par. 0041, mobile BS 101 in fig. 1 may be stationary or may move, and par. 0054 for detecting cell at frequency in a period of time based on a UE location, and par. 0074 UE may adjust measurement rate/periodicity based on the determined location; it means that increasing or decreasing cell measurement periodicity in fig. 4A-B would include starting and stopping; Luo, mobile IAB node may be moving as explained in par. 0137-139 or an IAB node may be stationary in par. 0083, 0137, 0140, 0142 & 0150; for these reasons, the combined prior art meets the claim condition).
Claim 10-17
Claims 10-17 are WTRU device claims corresponding to method claims 1-8. All the limitations in claim 10-17 are found reciting for the structures of the same scopes of the respective limitations in claims 1-8. Accordingly, claims 10-17 can be considered obvious by the same rationales applied in the rejection of claims 1-8 respectively, set forth above.
PNG
media_image4.png
676
552
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Santhanam discloses a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (UE in fig. 1-6) comprising: transceiver (transceiver 608 in fig. 6); and a processor (604 processor in fig. 6).
Claim 19
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 1, wherein modifying the measurement procedure (Santhanam, fig. 4A-B) includes at least one of the following:
starting or stopping performing neighbor cell measurements or serving cell measurements;
starting or stopping sending neighbor cell measurement reports or serving neighbor cell measurement reports;
performing the measurements in a relaxed manner (Santhanam, decreasing measurement periodicity in fig. 4A-B could be said a relaxed manner); or
applying different parameters for measurement evaluation (Santhanam, changing frequency one or more in fig. 4 for measuring in fig. 4A-B would include applying different parameters; accordingly, the combined prior art meets the claim requirement).
Claim 20
Claim 20 is a WTRU claim corresponding to method claim 19. All of the limitations of claim 20 are found reciting the same scopes of the respective limitations in claim 19. Accordingly, claim 20 can be considered obvious by the same applied in the rejection of claim 19 set forth above.
Claim 21
Santhanam, in view of Luo, discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first broadcast information is received in a system information broadcast (SIB) (Santhanam, PBCH in fig. 3A and SYNC burst set in fig. 3B;. Luo, SIB in par. 0156, 0161 & 0191; and thus, the combined prior art reads on the claim).
Claim 22
Claim 22 is a WTRU claim corresponding to method claim 21. All of the limitations of claim 22 are found reciting the same scopes of the respective limitations in claim 21. Accordingly, claim 22 can be considered obvious by the same applied in the rejection of claim 21 set forth above.
Contact Information
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAN HTUN whose telephone number is (571)270-3190. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 PM.
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, Jinsong Hu can be reached on 5712723965. 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.
/SAN HTUN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643