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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 11, 14, 17-18 and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thangarasa et al. (U.S. PGPub 2022/0070743), hereinafter referred to as Thangarasa.
Regarding claim 1, Thangarasa discloses an apparatus (UE; See Fig. 11, #1100) configured for wireless communications, comprising: one or more memories (See Fig. 11, #1104) comprising processor-executable instructions; and one or more processors (See Fig. 11, #1102) configured to execute the processor-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to:
receive, via a first cell, a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising an indication to redirect communications via the first cell to a second cell (The UE obtains information about at least one cell change configuration. In some embodiments, the cell change configuration(s) is obtained from a network node. The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061] and [0126]); and
perform a reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication (the UE performs or executes the cell change from cell1 to cell2 based on the obtained cell change configuration(s) and the measurement results; See [0130]).
Regarding claim 11, Thangarasa further discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the first cell, cell information for a dedicated redirection cell (one or more configurations is received, wherein when there is only one received, that is interpreted as the dedicated; See [0126]); and perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the cell information for the dedicated redirection cell, wherein the second cell comprises the dedicated redirection cell (the UE performs or executes the cell change from cell1 to cell2 based on the obtained cell change configuration(s) and the measurement results; See [0130]).
Regarding claim 14, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus comprises a device operating in a control plane Internet of Things (IoT) optimization mode (narrow band internet of things (NB-IoT); See [0094]).
Regarding claim 17, Thangarasa discloses a method for wireless communications by an apparatus comprising:
receiving, via a first cell, a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising an indication to redirect communications via the first cell to a second cell (The UE obtains information about at least one cell change configuration. In some embodiments, the cell change configuration(s) is obtained from a network node. The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061] and [0126]); and
performing a reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication (the UE performs or executes the cell change from cell1 to cell2 based on the obtained cell change configuration(s) and the measurement results; See [0130]).
Regarding claim 18, Thangarasa discloses an apparatus (radio access node; See Fig. 8, #800) configured for wireless communications, comprising: one or more memories (See Fig. 8, #806) comprising processor-executable instructions; and one or more processors (See Fig. 8, #804) configured to execute the processor-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to:
determine to redirect communications via a first cell to a second cell for a device (Obtaining a cell change configuration comprising at least information about preventive and fallback mechanisms and associated parameters; See [0122]); and
send, to the device via the first cell, a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising an indication configured to trigger the device to perform a reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on the determination (the network node sends the RRC message to the UE; See [0126]).
Regarding claim 29, Thangarasa further discloses the apparatus of claim 18, wherein:
the apparatus comprises a base station (radio access node; See Fig. 8); and
the device comprises a device operating in a control plane Internet of Things (IoT) optimization mode (narrow band internet of things (NB-IoT); See [0094]).
Regarding claim 30, Thangarasa discloses a method for wireless communications by an apparatus comprising:
determining to redirect communications via a first cell to a second cell for a device (Obtaining a cell change configuration comprising at least information about preventive and fallback mechanisms and associated parameters; See [0122]); and
sending, to the device via the first cell, a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising an indication configured to trigger the device to perform a reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on the determination (the network node sends the RRC message to the UE; See [0126]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 2-3, 6, 8, 19-20, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Fu et al. (U.S. PGPub 2023/0209426), hereinafter referred to as Fu.
Regarding claim 2, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the RRC message comprises an RRC release message (The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061]), but fails explicitly teach the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell.
Fu teaches the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell (the redirection message comprising an information element; See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 3, Thangarasa further teaches the method of claim 2, wherein: the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to select the second cell for redirecting the communications from the one or more cells indicated by the IE, the second cell selected based at least in part on a dedicated carrier offset, timer information, a threshold value (the UE may perform measurements on neighbor cells operating on the serving carrier frequency and neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers indicated in the obtained configuration information when one or more measurement criteria is met e.g. when the serving cell (cell1) signal measurement (e.g. SS-RSRP, SS-RSRQ etc.) falls below certain signal threshold. In another example, the UE may periodically perform measurements on neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers associated with a priority level higher than the priority level of the serving carrier. The priority levels associated with different carrier frequencies are indicated in the configuration information transmitted to the UE by the network node e.g. serving cel; See [0127]), or a combination thereof.
Thangarasa fails to teach wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency, a cell identifier, satellite information, a master information block (MIB), one or more system information blocks (SIBs), or a combination thereof for each cell of one or more cells to which the communications can be redirected.
Fu teaches wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency (See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 6, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the RRC message comprises an RRC reestablishment message (The UE obtains information about at least one cell change configuration. In some embodiments, the cell change configuration(s) is obtained from a network node. The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061] and [0126]), but fails to teach the RRC reestablishment message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell.
Fu teaches the redirection message comprising an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell (the redirection message comprising an information element; See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include the redirection message comprising an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 8, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the RRC reestablishment message is received and the reestablishment procedure is triggered based at least in part on access stratum (AS) not being enabled for the communications via the first cell, a threshold to select the second cell being satisfied, or a combination thereof (the UE may perform measurements on neighbor cells operating on the serving carrier frequency and neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers indicated in the obtained configuration information when one or more measurement criteria is met e.g. when the serving cell (cell1) signal measurement (e.g. SS-RSRP, SS-RSRQ etc.) falls below certain signal threshold. In another example, the UE may periodically perform measurements on neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers associated with a priority level higher than the priority level of the serving carrier. The priority levels associated with different carrier frequencies are indicated in the configuration information transmitted to the UE by the network node e.g. serving cel; See [0127]).
Regarding claim 19, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 18, wherein: the RRC message comprises an RRC release message (The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061]); but fails to explicitly teach the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell.
Fu teaches the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell (the redirection message comprising an information element; See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include the RRC release message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 20. The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the IE comprises a carrier frequency, a cell identifier, satellite information, a master information block (MIB), one or more system information blocks (SIBs), or a combination thereof for each cell of one or more cells to which the communications can be redirected for the device.
Thangarasa fails to teach wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency, a cell identifier, satellite information, a master information block (MIB), one or more system information blocks (SIBs), or a combination thereof for each cell of one or more cells to which the communications can be redirected for the device.
Fu teaches wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency (See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein: the IE comprises a carrier frequency taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 23, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 18, wherein: the RRC message comprises an RRC reestablishment message (The UE obtains information about at least one cell change configuration. In some embodiments, the cell change configuration(s) is obtained from a network node. The cell change is a cell reselection, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection release with redirection, a RRC re-establishment, or a RRC resume.; See [0061] and [0126]) but fails to teach the RRC reestablishment message comprises an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell.
Fu teaches the redirection message comprising an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell (the redirection message comprising an information element; See [0162]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include the redirection message comprising an information element (IE) used to indicate redirection of the communications to the second cell taught by Fu in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 25, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the RRC reestablishment message comprising the IE is sent to trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure based at least in part on access stratum (AS) not being enabled for the communications for the device via the first cell, a threshold to select the second cell being satisfied, or a combination thereof (the UE may perform measurements on neighbor cells operating on the serving carrier frequency and neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers indicated in the obtained configuration information when one or more measurement criteria is met e.g. when the serving cell (cell1) signal measurement (e.g. SS-RSRP, SS-RSRQ etc.) falls below certain signal threshold. In another example, the UE may periodically perform measurements on neighbor cells belonging to one or more non-serving carriers associated with a priority level higher than the priority level of the serving carrier. The priority levels associated with different carrier frequencies are indicated in the configuration information transmitted to the UE by the network node e.g. serving cel; See [0127]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sedin et al. (U.S. PGPub 2024/0163763), hereinafter referred to as Sedin.
Regarding claim 4, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger a radio link failure (RLF) procedure for the communications via the first cell based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications; and send, via the second cell, an RRC reestablishment request message based at least in part on triggering the RLF procedure.
Sedin teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger a radio link failure (RLF) procedure for the communications via the first cell based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications; and send, via the second cell, an RRC reestablishment request message based at least in part on triggering the RLF procedure (triggering radio link failure and performing a reestablishment procedure; See Fig. 2, #201-207).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger a radio link failure (RLF) procedure for the communications via the first cell based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications; and send, via the second cell, an RRC reestablishment request message based at least in part on triggering the RLF procedure taught by Sedin in order to perform handover proceedings.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa in view of Sedin as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of You et al. (U.S. PGPub 2025/0203469), hereinafter referred to as You.
Regarding claim 5, Thangarasa in view of Sedin fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the RRC reestablishment request message comprises a redirect indication, a reestablishment cause IE comprising the redirect indication, a logical channel identifier (LCID) codepoint corresponding to the redirect indication, or a combination thereof.
You teaches a cause value indicating the redirect indication (the RRC re-establishment request message further includes a cause value of a cell handover failure. The cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover fails to be selected, or the cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover cannot be accessed after the target cell is selected; See [0023]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa in view of Sedin to include wherein the RRC reestablishment request message comprises a redirect indication, a reestablishment cause IE comprising the redirect indication taught by You in order to optimize handover.
Claims 7 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa in view of Fu as applied to claims 6 and 23 above, and further in view of Sedin.
Regarding claim 7, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to send, via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on performing the reestablishment procedure.
Sedin teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to send, via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on performing the reestablishment procedure (the UE responds with RRC re-establishment complete message; See [0035]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa in view of Fu to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to send, via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on performing the reestablishment procedure taught by Sedin in order to end handover proceedings.
Regarding claim 24, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to receive, from the device via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on the device performing the reestablishment procedure after the RRC reestablishment message comprising the IE is sent to the device.
Sedin teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to receive, from the device via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on the device performing the reestablishment procedure after the RRC reestablishment message comprising the IE is sent to the device (the UE responds with RRC re-establishment complete message; See [0035]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa in view of Fu to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to receive, from the device via the second cell, an RRC connection reestablishment complete message based at least on the device performing the reestablishment procedure after the RRC reestablishment message comprising the IE is sent to the device taught by Sedin in order to end handover proceedings.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa in view of Fu as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (U.S. PGPub 2020/0021993), hereinafter referred to as Yang.
Regarding claim 9, Thangarasa further teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein: the RRC reestablishment message a dedicated radio resource configuration corresponding to the second cell (one or more configurations is received, wherein when there is only one received, that is interpreted as the dedicated; See [0126]) and the reestablishment procedure is performed to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on the dedicated radio resource configuration corresponding to the second cell (the UE performs or executes the cell change from cell1 to cell2 based on the obtained cell change configuration(s) and the measurement results; See [0130]), but fails to teach the RRC reestablishment message also comprising a downlink Non-Access stratum (NAS) medium access control (MAC) IE.
Yang teaches the RRC reestablishment message also comprising a downlink Non-Access stratum (NAS) medium access control (MAC) IE (Representative RRC signaling messages that can be integrity protected include RRC configuration messages and RRC redirection messages; See [0022]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa in view of Fu to include the RRC reestablishment message also comprising a downlink Non-Access stratum (NAS) medium access control (MAC) IE taught by Yang in order to optimize security protocols.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (Int. Pub. No. WO 2023/007020A1), hereinafter referred to as Wang.
Regarding claim 10, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the first cell, a configuration to ignore an access barring check for the second cell; and perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the configuration.
Wang teaches an apparatus configured to receive, via the first cell, a configuration to ignore an access barring check for the second cell (The IAB-MT ignores cell-barring or cell-reservation indications contained in cell system information broadcast, wherein the cell system information broadcast is interpreted as the received configuration; See page 42, lines 1-2) and perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the configuration (The IAB-MT only considers a cell as a candidate for cell selection if the cell system information broadcast indicates IAB support for the selected PLMN, suggesting that the procedure is based on the configuration received; See page 42, lines 3-4).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the first cell, a configuration to ignore an access barring check for the second cell; and perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the configuration taught by Wang in order to minimize delay during handover.
Claims 12-13 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Sillanpaa et al. (U.S. PGPub 2019/0394683), hereinafter referred to as Sillanpaa.
Regarding claim 12, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the first cell, an ordered list of one or more cells neighboring the first cell, the one or more cells neighboring the first cell being ordered based at least in part on measurements performed on the one or more cells; and receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications based at least in part on sending the ordered list.
Sillanpaa teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the first cell, an ordered list of one or more cells neighboring the first cell, the one or more cells neighboring the first cell being ordered based at least in part on measurements performed on the one or more cells (sending priority lists based on signal strength measurements; See [0037]); and receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications based at least in part on sending the ordered list (triggering a redirect of the RRC connection; See [0035]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the first cell, an ordered list of one or more cells neighboring the first cell, the one or more cells neighboring the first cell being ordered based at least in part on measurements performed on the one or more cells; and receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications based at least in part on sending the ordered list taught by Sillanpaa in order to minimize delay during handover.
Regarding claim 13, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the ordered list of the one or more cells neighboring the first cell is sent via an uplink transfer information message, an uplink dedicated control channel (DCCH) message, or an uplink MAC control element (CE).
Sillanpaa teaches the UE transmitting the lists, suggesting an uplink transfer information message (See [0037]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the ordered list of the one or more cells neighboring the first cell is sent via an uplink transfer information message, an uplink dedicated control channel (DCCH) message, or an uplink MAC control element (CE) taught by Sillanpaa in order to minimize delay during handover.
Regarding claim 26, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, from the device via the first cell, an ordered list of one or more cells neighboring the first cell, wherein the ordered list of the one or more cells neighboring the first cell comprises the second cell (sending priority lists based on signal strength measurements; See [0037]); and send the RRC message comprising the indication configured to trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the ordered list (triggering a redirect of the RRC connection; See [0035]).
Sillanpaa teaches one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, from the device via the first cell, an ordered list of one or more cells neighboring the first cell, wherein the ordered list of the one or more cells neighboring the first cell comprises the second cell; and send the RRC message comprising the indication configured to trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on receiving the ordered list.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the ordered list of the one or more cells neighboring the first cell is sent via an uplink transfer information message, an uplink dedicated control channel (DCCH) message, or an uplink MAC control element (CE) taught by Sillanpaa in order to minimize delay during handover.
Regarding claim 27, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 26, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to prepare the second cell for the reestablishment procedure based at least in part on receiving the ordered list.
Sillanpaa teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to prepare the second cell for the reestablishment procedure based at least in part on receiving the ordered list (suggested by the device receiving the priorities in the list; See [0037]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to prepare the second cell for the reestablishment procedure based at least in part on receiving the ordered list taught by Sillanpaa in order to minimize delay during handover.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang.
Regarding claim 15, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and a Non-Access Stratum (NAS) integrity protection parameter.
Yang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and a Non-Access Stratum (NAS) integrity protection parameter (Representative RRC signaling messages that can be integrity protected include RRC configuration messages and RRC redirection messages; See [0022]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and a Non-Access Stratum (NAS) integrity protection parameter taught by Yang in order to optimize security protocols.
Regarding claim 16, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the second cell, a reestablishment request message based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and the NAS integrity protection parameter, wherein the reestablishment request message comprises a response to the NAS integrity protection parameter.
Yang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the second cell, a reestablishment request message based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and the NAS integrity protection parameter, wherein the reestablishment request message comprises a response to the NAS integrity protection parameter (Representative RRC signaling messages that can be integrity protected include RRC configuration messages and RRC redirection messages; See [0022])
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: send, via the second cell, a reestablishment request message based at least in part on receiving the RRC message comprising the indication to redirect the communications and the NAS integrity protection parameter, wherein the reestablishment request message comprises a response to the NAS integrity protection parameter taught by Yang in order to optimize security protocols.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of You.
Regarding claim 21, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, from the device via the second cell, an RRC reestablishment request message based at least in part on sending the RRC message comprising the indication via the first cell.
You teaches receiving an RRC reestablishment request message (the RRC re-establishment request message further includes a cause value of a cell handover failure. The cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover fails to be selected, or the cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover cannot be accessed after the target cell is selected; See [0023]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include receiving an RRC reestablishment request message taught by You in order to optimize handover.
Regarding claim 22, Thangarasa fails to further teach the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the RRC reestablishment request message comprises a redirect indication, a reestablishment cause IE comprising the redirect indication, a logical channel identifier (LCID) codepoint corresponding to the redirect indication, or a combination thereof.
You teaches a cause value indicating the redirect indication (the RRC re-establishment request message further includes a cause value of a cell handover failure. The cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover fails to be selected, or the cause value indicates that a target cell for the cell handover cannot be accessed after the target cell is selected; See [0023]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the RRC reestablishment request message comprises a redirect indication, a reestablishment cause IE comprising the redirect indication taught by You in order to optimize handover.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thangarasa as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Kazmi et al. (U.S. PGPub 2025/0126569), hereinafter referred to as Kazmi.
Regarding claim 28, Thangarasa fails to teach the apparatus of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on a load balancing demand, identifying a coverage area for the first cell is moving away from the device, receiving assistance information from the device, or a combination thereof.
Kazmi teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on a load balancing demand
(When a neighbouring cell becomes stronger than serving cell or for load balancing on the serving cell, serving node can trigger the handover (HO) command; See [0138]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Thangarasa to include wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the apparatus to: trigger the device to perform the reestablishment procedure to redirect the communications to the second cell based at least in part on a load balancing demand taught by Kazmi in order to minimize loss.
Conclusion
Any response to this action should be 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 ASHLEY L SHIVERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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 at 571-272-3144. 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.
/ASHLEY SHIVERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 1/10/2026