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 .
Title of the Invention
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 are objected because of the following informalities: said claims recite IAB, OAM, F1 without spelling out. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruta (US 2013/0324130) in view of Xu et al. (US 2024/02842645, “Xu”) and Liu et al. (US 2024/0073768, “Liu”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Maruta unless otherwise mentioned.
Maruta comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a communication control method used in a cellular communication system, the communication control method comprising:
being configured with a first cell ID which is usable in a movable mobile IAB node from an OAM, by the mobile IAB node ([0063] “the mobile relay node 202-2 is being connected to the base station 201-2, and the mobile relay node cell ID is "31".” Note that Mobile Relay Node 202-2 is equivalent to the recited IAB node, and the relay node identification information management server is equivalent to the recited OAM.);
transmitting, by a target donor node, a Handover Request Acknowledgement message including an F1 message to a source donor node (This will be discussed in view of Xu.);
transmitting, by the source donor node, to the mobile IAB node a Handover Command message including the F1 message in response to the reception of the Handover Request Acknowledgement message (This will be discussed in view of Xu.); and
activating, by the mobile IAB node, a second cell ID including the F1 message ([0063 and Fig. 6] “the relay node identification information management server 206 transmits "mobile relay node cell ID change request" to one of the mobile relay nodes having duplicate IDs (which is the mobile relay node 202-2 in this example) in Step S609. In this step, the relay node identification information management server 206 transmits a mobile relay node cell ID (which is "32" in this example) that does not duplicate the mobile relay node cell IDs of at least nearby mobile relay nodes as the mobile relay node cell ID after change, as "mobile relay node cell ID change request".” Note that cell ID 32 goes to Mobile Relay Node 202-2 in S609. Note that a cell ID including a F1 message will be discussed in view of Liu.),
wherein the second cell ID is a cell ID not colliding with the first cell ID out of the cell ID available in the target donor node (aforesaid [0063] “that does not duplicate the mobile relay node cell IDs of at least nearby mobile relay nodes”. Note that initial cell ID of Mobile Relay Node 202-2 is 31. See Fig. 6.).
It is noted that while disclosing cell identifiers, Maruta does not specifically teach about a handover request ACK message. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Xu as follows;
transmitting, by a target donor node, a Handover Request Acknowledgement message including an F1 message to a source donor node ([Xu, 0122 and Fig. 7] “At 710, the target base station may transmit to the source base station a handover request acknowledge message, which may include MBS configuration information regarding the target base station.” Note that the target base station of Xu is equivalent to the recited target donor node, and MBS configuration information is equivalent to the recited F1 message.);
transmitting, by the source donor node, to the mobile IAB node a Handover Command message including the F1 message in response to the reception of the Handover Request Acknowledgement message ([Xu, 0123 and Fig. 7] “At 712, the source base station may forward to the UE an RRC reconfiguration message, including the MBS configuration information.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Maruta by using the features of Xu in order to improve functionalities such that “methods for improving Multicast and Broadcast Services (MBS) communications through service continuity during handover.” [Xu, 0005].
It is noted that while disclosing cell identifiers, Maruta does not specifically teach about a F1 message. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Liu as follows;
a cell ID including a F1 message ([Liu, 0096] “sends an F1 setup response message carrying the first candidate cell identifier to the IAB node.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Maruta by using the features of Liu in order to improve deployment flexibility such that “to send the candidate cell identifier of the IAB node under the target IAB donor-CU to the source IAB donor-CU of the IAB node, and the source IAB donor-CU transmits the candidate cell identifier to the sub node of the IAB node and/or the terminal connected to the IAB node.” [Liu, 0006].
Regarding claim 3, it is a system claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations, “a movable mobile IAB node; a source donor node; and a target donor node” (See Fig. 6), and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, it is a mobile IAB claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations, “a controller circuitry”, “a receiver circuitry” (See Fig. 9), and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, it is a non-transitory claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations, “storage medium storing a program for causing a computer” (See Fig. 9 and [0082]), and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, it is a chipset claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations, “a chipset for a mobile IAB node” ([Xu, 0087] “As shown, the UE 106 may include a system on chip (SOC) 300, which may include portions for various purposes. For example, as shown, the SOC 300 may include processor(s) 302 which may execute program instructions for the UE 106”), and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, the chipset according to claim 9, wherein the the second cell ID is a cell ID not colliding with the first cell ID out of the cell ID available in the target donor node (aforesaid [0063] “that does not duplicate the mobile relay node cell IDs of at least nearby mobile relay nodes”. Note that initial cell ID of Mobile Relay Node 202-2 is 31. See Fig. 6.).
Claim(s) 2, 4, 6 and 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruta (US 2013/0324130) in view of Xu et al. (US 2024/02842645, “Xu”) and Liu et al. (US 2024/0073768, “Liu”), and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2024/0073762, “Liu762”).
Regarding claims 2, 4, 6 and 8, it is noted that while disclosing cell identifiers, Maruta does not specifically teach about a PCI. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Liu762 as follows;
the communication control method according to claim 1, the cellular communication system according to claim 3, the mobile IAB node according to claim 5, and the non-transitory CRM according to claim 7, respectively, wherein the cell ID is a physical cell ID (PCI) ([Liu762, 0113] “the IAB node 3 derives the key A2 by using the key A1 and a physical cell identifier (physical cell identifier, PCI) of a target cell (the target cell is a cell to which the donor base station 1 indicates that the IAB node 3 needs to be handed over) that is of the donor base station 2”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Maruta by using the features of Liu762 in order to improve deployment flexibility such that “a flexible and convenient backhaul solution also needs to be designed.” [Liu762, 0003].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411