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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendments filed on 06/09/2026.
Claims 16 and 22-40 are currently pending.
Claims 16 and 22-40 are rejected.
Claims 16, 22, 29 and 35 are independent claims.
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
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 of this title, 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 16 and 29-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linhai HE et al. (US 2021/0044342 A1), hereinafter HE, in view of Yuki Matsumura et al. (US 2024/0291547 A1), hereinafter Matsumura.
For claim 16, HE teaches a user equipment (UE) (HE, Fig. 3 item 350) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (HE, Fig. 3 item 360); and
at least one processor (HE, Fig. 3 item 359) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to:
receive, from a serving cell, configuration information related to two or more transmission reception points (TRPs) of the serving cell (HE, Fig. 9 step 902 and paragraph 88. See also Figs. 1, 4.);
detect a first beam failure of a first TRP within the two or more TRPs (HE, Figs. 9 step 904 and paragraph 89.);
perform a first beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first TRP (HE, Fig. 9 step 906 and paragraphs 90-91.);
detect, before receiving a response for the first BFR request from the serving cell, a second beam failure of a second TRP within the two or more TRPs (HE, Fig. 9 step 908 and paragraph 92.); and
monitor a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) within a period (HE, Fig. 910 and paragraph 93.) wherein the period is associated with a time window in a time domain, wherein the time window starts upon transmitting the first BFR request or the second BFR request (HE, Fig. 9 step 910 and paragraphs 70, 92.).
Matsumura further teaches performing a BFR including transmitting a BFR request (Matsumura, Fig. 1 step S104 and paragraphs 49-55.) and wherein a length of the time window is configured by the serving cell (Matsumura, Fig. 1 and paragraphs 60.).
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 method taught in HE with performing a BFR including transmitting a BFR request and wherein a length of the time window is configured by the serving cell taught in Matsumura. Because both references teach BFR procedure, Matsumura explicitly teaches time configuration.
For claim 29, HE teaches a processor (HE, Fig. 3 item 359) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one controller (HE, Fig. 3 item 359) coupled with at least one memory (HE, Fig. 3 item 360) and configured to cause the processor to:
receive, from a serving cell, configuration information related to two or more transmission reception points (TRPs) of the serving cell (HE, Fig. 9 step 902 and paragraph 88. See also Figs. 1, 4.);
detect a first beam failure of a first TRP within the two or more TRPs (HE, Figs. 9 step 904 and paragraph 89.);
perform a first beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first TRP (HE, Fig. 9 step 906 and paragraphs 90-91.);
detect, before receiving a response for the first BFR request from the serving cell, a second beam failure of a second TRP within the two or more TRPs (HE, Fig. 9 step 908 and paragraph 92.); and
monitor a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) within a period (HE, Fig. 910 and paragraph 93.) wherein the period is associated with a time window in a time domain, wherein the time window starts upon transmitting the first BFR request or the second BFR request (HE, Fig. 9 step 910 and paragraphs 70, 92.).
Matsumura further teaches performing a BFR including transmitting a BFR request (Matsumura, Fig. 1 step S104 and paragraphs 49-55.) and wherein a length of the time window is configured by the serving cell (Matsumura, Fig. 1 and paragraphs 60.).
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 method taught in HE with performing a BFR including transmitting a BFR request and wherein a length of the time window is configured by the serving cell taught in Matsumura. Because both references teach BFR procedure, Matsumura explicitly teaches time configuration.
For claim 30, HE and Matsumura further teach the processor of Claim 29, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to: perform, in response to ending of the period, a random access channel (RACH) procedure (HE, Fig. 8 step 846 and paragraph 94.).
For claim 31, HE and Matsumura further teach the processor of Claim 30, wherein the RACH procedure is based on configuration information related to a BFR procedure for the serving cell (HE, Fig. 8 step 846 and paragraph 94.).
For claim 32, HE and Matsumura further teach the processor of Claim 29, wherein the period is associated with a timer, the period starts in response to starting of the timer, and the period ends in response to an expiry of the timer or stopping of the timer (HE, Figs. 6, 8 and paragraph 70. See also Matsumura, Fig. 1 and paragraphs 43, 62.).
For claim 33, HE and Matsumura further teach the processor of Claim 32, wherein the timer is configured to start in response to one or more of: transmission of the first BFR request, and detection of the second beam failure; transmission of the first BFR request; or detection of the second beam failure, and transmission of the second BFRrequest (HE, Figs. 6, 8 and paragraph 70. See also Matsumura, Fig. 1 step S104 and paragraphs 44-50.).
For claim 34, HE and Sang further teach the processor of Claim 32, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to stop the timer in response to one or more of: receiving the response for the BFR request from the serving cell; or receiving a response for a second BFR request from the serving cell (HE, Figs. 6, 8 and paragraph 70. See also Matsumura, Figs. 1 step S105 and paragraphs 56-72.).
9. Claims 22-28 and 35-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sangbum KIM et al. (US 2020/0351731 A1), hereinafter KIM, in view of Ningjuan CHANG et al. (US 2023/0262542 A1), hereinafter CHANG.
For claim 22, HE teaches a user equipment (UE) (KIM, Fig. 1D.) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (KIM, Fig. 1F item 1f-30.); and
at least one processor (KIM, Fig. 1F item 1f-40.) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to:
receive, from a serving cell, configuration information of a handover procedure related to one or more candidate cells (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-30 and paragraph 52.), wherein the handover procedure is performed based on that an activation indication of the handover procedure is received (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60-70 and paragraphs 52-53.); and
receive, from the serving cell, at least one of:
a normal handover command;
a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover command; or
configuration information regarding a conditional handover (CHO) procedure; (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraph 52.) and
wherein the activation indication includes an index of the candidate cell (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraphs 52-53 teach the source cell includes the handover configuration information, received from the target cells, and additional configuration information in an RRC message, and transmits the RRC message to the UE (indicated by reference numeral 1d-60). The configuration information includes each ID of the target cells, frequency information, configuration information required for an operation of random access to the target cells (dedicated preamble information and dedicated radio resource information for each target cell, etc.), transmission power information, C-RNTI information used in each target cell, conditions for triggering an operation of random access to each target cell, and the like. Each of the above conditions may be different for each target cell, and a plurality of conditions may be configured for one target cell. See also paragraph 49 for target cell ID in the configuration information.).
CHANG further teaches receive, by a physical layer or a medium access control (MAC) layer of the UE, the indication from the serving cell (CHANG, Fig. 1 and paragraph 37 teach the UE considers that an RLF has occurred when one of the following conditions occurs: a timer T310 used for RLF monitoring expires, a timer T312 used for fast RLF monitoring expires, an indication of a random access problem is received from a MAC layer, and an indication used to indicate that the maximum number of RLC retransmissions has been reached is received from an RLC entity. During the DAPS handover, if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the source base station MCG, it is considered that a source base station MCG RLF (a source base station RLF for short) has been detected; if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the target base station MCG, it is considered that a target base station MCG RLF has been detected. In the case of single connectivity or dual connectivity, if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the MCG, it is considered that an MCG RLF is detected. In dual connectivity (DC), the UE is configured with a secondary cell group (SCG), and if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the SCG, it is considered that an SCG RLF has been detected.)
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 method taught in HE to have receive, by a physical layer or a medium access control (MAC) layer of the UE, the indication from the serving cell taught by CHANG. Because both references teach handover in the same technical field, CHANG explicitly teaches receiving an indication in a MAC layer of the UE form the source base station.
For claims 23, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 22, wherein the activation indication includes a physical layer identifier (PCID) of a candidate cell within the one or more candidate cells, wherein the index of the candidate cell is associated with the PCID of the candidate cell or a cell global identifier (CGI) of the candidate cell (KIM, paragraph 49 for target cell ID. CHANG, paragraph 72 for CGI and PCID.).
For claims 24, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 23, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
indicate, in response to receiving the activation indication by the physical layer or the MAC layer of the UE (CHANG, Fig. 1 and paragraph 37) and in response to receiving the configuration information regarding the CHO procedure (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraph 52.), and by one or more of the physical layer or the MAC layer of the UE, the activation indication to a RRC layer of the UE (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.).
For claims 25, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 24, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
in response to receiving, by the RRC layer of the UE, the activation indication from one or more of the physical layer or the MAC layer of the UE:
stop, by the RRC layer of the UE, an evaluation of the condition of the CHO procedure and not triggering the CHO procedure; or
in response to meeting the condition of the CHO procedure, one or more of:
perform the cell switch procedure in priority; or
select a candidate cell with a best channel quality from the cell switch procedure and the CHO procedure for cell switch (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60-70 and paragraphs 52-53.).
For claims 26, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 22, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message from the serving cell, wherein the RRC reconfiguration message includes an indication to indicate that the RRC reconfiguration message can be applied after a physical layer or a MAC layer of the UE receives the activation indication from the serving cell (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.).
For claims 27, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 26, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
check, in response to receiving the RRC reconfiguration message, compliance of the received RRC reconfiguration message (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.)
For claims 28, Kim and CHANG further teach the UE of Claim 27, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
report, in response to the RRC layer of the UE not compliant with the RRC reconfiguration message, a compliance failure to the serving cell (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-85-105 and paragraph 53-54.)
For claim 35, HE teaches a processor (KIM, Fig. 1F item 1f-40.) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one controller (KIM, Fig. 1F item 1f-40.) coupled with at least one memory (KIM, Fig. 1F item 1f-30.) and configured to cause the processor to:
receive, from a serving cell, configuration information of a handover procedure related to one or more candidate cells (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-30 and paragraph 52.), wherein the handover procedure is performed based on that an activation indication of the handover procedure is received (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60-70 and paragraphs 52-53.); and
receive, from the serving cell, at least one of:
a normal handover command;
a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover command; or
configuration information regarding a conditional handover (CHO) procedure; (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraph 52.) and
wherein the activation indication includes an index of the candidate cell (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraphs 52-53 teach the source cell includes the handover configuration information, received from the target cells, and additional configuration information in an RRC message, and transmits the RRC message to the UE (indicated by reference numeral 1d-60). The configuration information includes each ID of the target cells, frequency information, configuration information required for an operation of random access to the target cells (dedicated preamble information and dedicated radio resource information for each target cell, etc.), transmission power information, C-RNTI information used in each target cell, conditions for triggering an operation of random access to each target cell, and the like. Each of the above conditions may be different for each target cell, and a plurality of conditions may be configured for one target cell. See also paragraph 49 for target cell ID in the configuration information.).
CHANG further teaches receive, by a physical layer or a medium access control (MAC) layer of the UE, the indication from the serving cell (CHANG, Fig. 1 and paragraph 37 teach the UE considers that an RLF has occurred when one of the following conditions occurs: a timer T310 used for RLF monitoring expires, a timer T312 used for fast RLF monitoring expires, an indication of a random access problem is received from a MAC layer, and an indication used to indicate that the maximum number of RLC retransmissions has been reached is received from an RLC entity. During the DAPS handover, if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the source base station MCG, it is considered that a source base station MCG RLF (a source base station RLF for short) has been detected; if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the target base station MCG, it is considered that a target base station MCG RLF has been detected. In the case of single connectivity or dual connectivity, if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the MCG, it is considered that an MCG RLF is detected. In dual connectivity (DC), the UE is configured with a secondary cell group (SCG), and if the above timers, MAC entity, and RLC are associated with the SCG, it is considered that an SCG RLF has been detected.)
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 method taught in HE to have receive, by a physical layer or a medium access control (MAC) layer of the UE, the indication from the serving cell taught by CHANG. Because both references teach handover in the same technical field, CHANG explicitly teaches receiving an indication in a MAC layer of the UE form the source base station.
For claims 36, Kim and CHANG further teach the processor of Claim 35, wherein the activation indication includes a physical layer identifier (PCID) of a candidate cell within the one or more candidate cells, wherein the index of the candidate cell is associated with the PCID of the candidate cell or a cell global identifier (CGI) of the candidate cell (KIM, paragraph 49 for target cell ID. CHANG, paragraph 72 for CGI and PCID.).
For claims 37, Kim and CHANG further teach the processor of Claim 36, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to: indicate, in response to receiving the activation indication by the physical layer or the MAC layer of the UE (CHANG, Fig. 1 and paragraph 37) and in response to receiving the configuration information regarding the CHO procedure (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-60 and paragraph 52.), and by one or more of the physical layer or the MAC layer of the UE, the activation indication to a RRC layer of the UE (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.).
For claims 38, Kim and CHANG further teach the processor of Claim 35, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to:receive a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message from the serving cell, wherein the RRC reconfiguration message includes an indication to indicate that the RRC reconfiguration message can be applied after a physical layer or a MAC layer of the UE receives the activation indication from the serving cell (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.).
For claims 39, Kim and CHANG further teach the processor of Claim 38, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to: check, in response to receiving the RRC reconfiguration message, compliance of the received RRC reconfiguration message (CHANG, paragraph 73 teaches information 4, used to indicate that a stored RRC reconfiguration message corresponding to a handover candidate cell and applied due to execution of a conditional handover procedure is generated in a cell selection procedure performed during operation of T311.)
For claims 40, Kim and CHANG further teach the processor of Claim 39, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to: report, in response to the RRC layer of the UE not compliant with the RRC reconfiguration message, a compliance failure to the serving cell (KIM, Fig. 1D step 1d-85-105 and paragraph 53-54.)
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant's arguments filed 06/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because of the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILL W LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8749. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at 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.
/WILL W LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights