DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 31, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 31, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The argument features Purkayastha teaches to autonomously decide, at the UE, to perform the CHO.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that the UE makes the decision (par. 49, lines 3-8) based on the instructions (par. 48, lines 3-9) provided by the source base station (par. 48, lines 1-3).
The argument features Purkayastha is silent about the network node is to receive from the wireless communication network, a trigger signal comprising information to perform the action and to perform the action based on the trigger signal.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Purkayastha discloses the network node (e.g. UE) is to receive from the wireless communication network (e.g. source base station) (par. 48, lines 1-3), a trigger signal comprising information to perform the action (e.g. handover criteria) (par. 48, lines 3-9) and to perform the action (e.g. handover) based on the trigger signal (e.g. handover criteria) (par. 49, lines 3-8).
The applicant will need to further amend the independent claims to clearly indicate the patentable subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Purkayastha et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2020/0351734).
Consider claim 1; Purkayastha discloses a network node (e.g. UE) configured for operating in a wireless communication network (par. 48, lines 1-9; par. 58),
wherein the network node (e.g. UE) is configured or pre-configured with configuration instructions or to receive configuration instructions (par. 48, lines 1-9), the configuration instructions related to an action that causes the network node (e.g. UE) to disconnect from the wireless communication network [e.g. handover (par. 48, lines 1-9; par. 58)];
wherein the network node (e.g. UE) is to receive (par. 48, lines 1-9, from the wireless communication network (e.g. source base station) (par. 48, lines 1-9, a wireless signal (par. 56, lines 1-2) as a trigger signal comprising a message providing information to perform the action (e.g. handover criteria) (par. 48, lines 3-9); wherein the network node (e.g. UE) is to evaluate the message [e.g. determine if the handover criteria is met (par. 49, lines 3-8)]; and
performing the action (par. 49, lines 6-8) based on the trigger signal [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)],
wherein the action further relates to one or more of
a reconnection action to reconnect to the wireless communication network,
a deregister action, e.g., access barring;
an initiation of a cell-search;
a normal handover;
a conditional handover, CHO (par. 48, lines 1-9).
Consider claim 2; Purkayastha discloses the network node (e.g. UE) is configured or pre-configured with a conditional handover, CHO, configuration as the action (par. 48, lines 1-3), which is triggerable by the wireless communication network (e.g. source base station) via the message [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)].
Consider claim 3; Purkayastha discloses the network node (e.g. UE) is configured or pre-configured with a conditional handover, CHO, configuration as the action (par. 48, lines 1-3), which is exclusively triggerable by the wireless communication network (e.g. source base station) via the message [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)].
Consider claim 4; Purkayastha discloses the conditional handover, CHO, configuration (par. 48, lines 1-9) is configured in a firmware of the network node or hard-coded (par. 128, lines 4-7; par. 132, lines 1-4).
Consider claim 5; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured, pre-configured or to receive expiration information associated with the configuration instructions and indicating an expiration of the configuration instructions to operate according to the trigger signal only before the expiration of the configuration instructions (par. 84, lines 13-17).
Consider claim 6; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured for receiving a configuration signal comprising the configuration instructions and the trigger signal together as an execution signal, as a single message, and/or as separate messages (par. 48, lines 1-9).
Consider claim 7; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured for receiving the configuration instructions during a first instance of time and for preparing the action (par. 83, lines 1-4); and for receiving the message of the trigger signal [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)] during a later (par. 84, lines 17-20), second instance of time (par. 84, lines 17-20).
Consider claim 8; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured for
performing the action directly after having received the message of the trigger signal; or
performing the action with a predefined delay after having received the message of the trigger signal; or
performing the action based on an execution and/or time preference of the network node (par. 83, lines 1-4) after having received the message of the trigger signal, e.g., in accordance with the configuration instructions [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)]; or
performing the action based on a further trigger condition and/or a further status within the network node.
Consider claim 9; Purkayastha discloses the configuration instructions indicate a designated access node or group of access nodes of the wireless communication network (e.g. target base stations) to which the network node is requested to connect (par. 48, lines 1-9), wherein the network node is configured for connecting to the designated access node when performing the action (par. 48, lines 1-9).
Consider claim 10; Purkayastha discloses the configuration instructions indicate a plurality of designated access nodes of the wireless communication network to which the network node is requested to connect (par. 48, lines 1-9), the plurality being ordered in an ordered list [e.g. based on quality or timer (par. 118, lines 19-24)], wherein the network node is to select a new access node from the ordered list based on side information (par. 118, lines 19-24).
Consider claim 11; Purkayastha discloses the network node (e.g. UE) is configured for performing the action exclusively responsive to the message of the trigger signal [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)].
Consider claim 12; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured for performing the action based on the message of the trigger signal [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)] and/or based on at least one additional event (par. 48, lines 1-9); wherein the network node is configured for performing the action based on having determined that the at least one event has occurred [e.g. the handover criteria (par. 49, lines 1-8)].
Consider claim 13; Purkayastha discloses the network node is configured for performing the action (par. 48, lines 1-9), the action comprising to connect to a designated access node indicated in the configuration instructions (par. 48, lines 1-9), the designated access node comprising a metric relating to a channel quality, a link quality and/or a link capability being lower when compared to a different access node being reachable for the network node (par. 154, lines 1-15).
Consider claim 14; Purkayastha discloses the configuration instructions comprise a plurality of actions (par. 48, lines 1-9); wherein, responsive to the trigger signal (par. 48, lines 1-9), the network node is to select and perform one of the plurality of actions (par. 48, lines 1-9).
Consider claim 15; Purkayastha discloses the configuration instructions indicate a plurality of access nodes (e.g. target base stations) (par. 48, lines 1-9), e.g., as a plurality of configurations or preconfigurations for a conditional handover (par. 48, lines 1-9), to which the network node may connect (par. 48, lines 1-9); wherein, responsive to the trigger signal (par. 48, lines 1-9), the network node is to select at least one of the plurality of access nodes as selected access node and to connect to the selected access node (par. 49, lines 1-8).
Consider claim 17; Purkayastha discloses the network node is or comprises one or more of:
a user equipment, UE (par. 48, lines 1-9);
a group lead UE;
a relay node;
a road side unit, RSU,
an integrated access and backhaul, IAB, node
Consider claim 18; Purkayastha discloses an access node (e.g. source base station) configured for operating in a wireless communication network, the access node configured for providing a connection or proxy-access for a network node of the wireless communication network, the access node configured for:
transmitting a wireless signal (par. 56, lines 1-2) as a trigger signal (par. 48, lines 1-9), to a network node (e.g. UE) (par. 48, lines 1-9), the trigger signal comprising a message providing information indicating that the network node (e.g. UE) is requested to perform an action that causes the network node (e.g. UE) to disconnect from the wireless communication network [e.g. handover criteria (par. 48, lines 3-9)] and for which the network node is configured or pre-configured (par. 48, lines 1-9); wherein the action relates to one or more of
a reconnection action to reconnect to the wireless communication network,
a deregister action, e.g., access barring;
an initiation of a cell-search;
a normal handover;
a conditional handover, CHO (par. 48, lines 1-9).
Consider claim 19; Purkayastha discloses the access node is to provide the proxy-access for a network node (par. 83, lines 1-4, 7-15); wherein the access node is to operate by use of a first identifier associated with the access node (par. 83, lines 1-4, 7-15); wherein the access node is to receive a signal comprising information to request the access node to operate by use of a second identifier associated with a different access node so as to operate as a proxy for connections of the different access node (par. 83, lines 1-4, 7-15).
Consider claim 20; Purkayastha discloses a wireless communication network, comprising: at least one network node of claim 1 (par. 55, lines 4-9); and at least one access node of claim 18 (par. 55, lines 4-9).
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 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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purkayastha et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2020/0351734) in view of Khay-Ibbat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2014/0126544).
Consider claim 16, as applied in claim 1; Purkayasha discloses the claimed invention except: the network node is to receive the trigger signal while being in an RRC_IDLE state being associated with a first access node and for changing the association to a second access node in accordance with the configuration instructions responsive to the trigger signal; or wherein the network node is to receive the trigger signal while being in an RRC_INACTIVE state and for connecting to an access node in accordance with the configuration instructions when changing to an RRC_CONNECTED state.
In analogous art Khay-Ibbat discloses the network node is to receive the trigger signal while being in an RRC_IDLE state being associated with a first access node and for changing the association to a second access node in accordance with the configuration instructions responsive to the trigger signal (par. 45, lines 4-17; par. 66); or wherein the network node is to receive the trigger signal while being in an RRC_INACTIVE state and for connecting to an access node in accordance with the configuration instructions when changing to an RRC_CONNECTED state.
It is an object of Purkayastha’s invention to provide a method of managing handover configurations. It is an object of Khay-Ibbat’s invention to provide a method of cell reselection and handover procedures. 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 the teaching of Purkayastha by including an idle state, as taught by Khay-Ibbat, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a telecommunication network.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Joel Ajayi whose telephone number is (571) 270-1091. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Jeanette Parker can be reached on (571) 270-3647. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
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 questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free) or 703-305-3028.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/JOEL AJAYI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646