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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 01/29/2024.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 6, 8-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220345951).
Regarding claim 1 Ma disclose, a method performed by a user equipment (UE) for secondary node failure recovery in a non-standalone (NSA) communication system comprising:
identifying failure in a secondary node, the UE being connected to a master node and the secondary node para. 44, “identifying a failure of a failure of a connection to the SN1”;
sending, to the master node, information related to the failure of the secondary node para. 44, “sending a first message about a secondary cell group (SCG) failure to a master node (MN)” and an indication of a presence of a fallback secondary node configuration para. 45, “the first message may include at least one of following information: a PSCell identifier of a previous secondary node to which the UE successfully connects”;
evaluating an execution condition of the fallback secondary node based on a plurality of connection parameters para. 47, “identifying a success of the change of the connection from the SN1 to the SN2; and sending a second message about a secondary cell group SCG success to the MN, the second message including a configuration parameter and/or a measurement result in a successful secondary cell change process”; and
sending, to the master node, a Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration complete message to connect to the fallback secondary node based on that the execution condition is succeeded para. 349-350, “a UE sends a report message about a secondary cell group (SCG) success to an MN, a new EUTRAN RRC message SuccessfulSCGChangeReport is added as a report message”.
Regarding claim 2 Ma disclose, wherein the secondary node and the fallback secondary node are one of, a same or a different Radio Access Technology (RAT) para. 352, “The second node may be an access node such as an MN or an SN. The MN or the SN may be a gNB, or may be an eNB or an ng-eNB”.
Regarding claim 3 Ma disclose, further comprising: synchronizing, by the UE, with the fallback secondary node, wherein the fallback secondary node configuration is received from the master node para. 76, “the cell identifier (Previous PSCell Id) of a cell to which a previous secondary node SN1 to which the UE successfully connects before the SN change belongs; an identifier (Serving PSCell Id) of a second target secondary node SN3 reselected by the master node MN for the UE after the SCG failure”.
Regarding claim 6 Ma disclose, wherein evaluating execution condition of the fallback secondary node comprises:
determining whether each of a plurality of connection parameters associated with the fallback secondary node is within threshold ranges para. 119, “One of the following two conditions is satisfied: the message of the SCG failure reported by the UE carries the timeSCGChangeFailure, and the value of the timeSCGChangeFailure is lower than a preconfigured threshold”.
Regarding claim 8 the limitations of claim 8 are rejected in the same manner as analyzed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 9 Ma disclose, wherein identifying the fallback secondary node further comprises:
sending, to the fallback secondary node, a request to reserve resources for the UE para. 119, “In step 601, the MN sends an Xn signaling secondary node addition request (S-NODE ADDITION REQUEST) to the SN1, to require the SN1 to configure a resource for the UE”; and
receiving, from the fallback secondary node, a confirmation indicating reservation of resources for the UE para. 120, “The signaling may carry new SCG configuration information provided by the SN1 and sent to the MN through an RRC container”.
Regarding claim 10 Ma disclose, further comprising:
receiving, from the UE, information related to failure of the secondary node and an indication of the presence of a valid fallback secondary node configuration para. 45, “the first message may include at least one of following information: a PSCell identifier of a previous secondary node to which the UE successfully connects”;
receiving, from the UE, a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration complete message to connect the UE to the fallback secondary node, based on evaluation of the fallback secondary node by the UE para. 349-350, “a UE sends a report message about a secondary cell group (SCG) success to an MN, a new EUTRAN RRC message SuccessfulSCGChangeReport is added as a report message”;
sending an acknowledgement to the fallback secondary node; and releasing the secondary node para. 81, Fig. 4, “When the timer expires, the MN may remove the PCell of the SCG… In operation S433, the MN may receive a measurement report for a corresponding cell of the UE”.
Regarding claim 11 Ma disclose, wherein sending the fallback secondary node configuration further comprises:
receiving, from the UE, a report of one or more of a plurality of connection parameters associated with the fallback secondary node para. 47, “identifying a success of the change of the connection from the SN1 to the SN2; and sending a second message about a secondary cell group SCG success to the MN, the second message including a configuration parameter and/or a measurement result in a successful secondary cell change process”; and
sending, to the UE, a message to restart the validity timer when one or more of the plurality of connection parameters are within their respective threshold ranges para. 119, “The control unit 707 may initiate a timer, or may detect an end of the timer. A component for each operation of the control unit 707 may be commands/codes resided in the control unit 707 at least temporarily or a storage space storing the commands/codes, or may be part of a circuity of the control unit 707”.
Regarding claim 12 Ma disclose, further comprises: receiving, from the UE, information indicating expiration of the validity timer para. 81, Fig. 4, “In operation S433, the MN may receive a measurement report for a corresponding cell of the UE”; and
sending, to the fallback secondary node, a request to release resources reserved for the UE para. 119, “In step 601, the MN sends an Xn signaling secondary node addition request (S-NODE ADDITION REQUEST) to the SN1, to require the SN1 to configure a resource for the UE”.
Regarding claim 13 the limitations of claim 13 are rejected in the same manner as analyzed above with respect to claim 2.
Regarding claim 14 Ma disclose, wherein the plurality of connection parameters comprise: signal strength measurement parameters associated with the fallback secondary node and a signal quality associated with the fallback secondary node para. 10, “For example, these parameters may include a cell quality measurement result on the current SN, a cell quality measurement result on neighboring SNs, etc.”.
Regarding claim 15 Ma teaches, a User Equipment (UE) comprising: a memory; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry para. 385, “the entity 1500 includes a processor 1501, a memory 1502 coupled to the processor 1501”; furthermore claim 15 recites an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 1 and thus is rejected under the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claims 16-17 and 20 the limitations of claims 16-17 and 20, respectively, are rejected in the same manner as analyzed above with respect to claims 2-3 and 6, respectively.
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(s) 4-5, 7, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220345951) in view of Yoo et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220353776).
Regarding claim 4 Ma does not specifically disclose, further comprising:
initiating a validity timer associated with the fallback secondary node. However, Yoo teach, “may start a timer when an MN or SN-initiated SN release is performed. The timer may be a timer configured for a cell in which the SCG failure occurs” see para. 78.
Yoo further teach, measuring and reporting one or more of a plurality of connection parameters associated with the fallback secondary node, to the master node until an expiry of the validity timer para. 76, “the MN may configure a measurement report event (e.g., B1 event). The configuring of the measurement report event may refer, for example, to configuring of parameters including a predetermined (e.g., specified) condition in measurement reporting in which a measurement result is transmitted to a base station, when a UE satisfies a predetermined condition;
sending, to the master node, information indicating the expiry of the validity timer para. 81, Fig. 4, “In operation S433, the MN may receive a measurement report for a corresponding cell of the UE”; and -
releasing the fallback secondary node configuration based on the validity timer expiring para. 81, Fig. 4, “When the timer expires, the MN may remove the PCell of the SCG… In operation S433, the MN may receive a measurement report for a corresponding cell of the UE”.
Ma and Yoo are analogous because they pertain to the field of wireless communication and, more specifically, to transmission parameters.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yoo which handles link failures in communications systems with several participant technologies in the system of Ma to be able to timely perform measurements on the communication channel to identify the current conditions and possible reasons for the failure. The motivation for doing so would have been to maintain the quality of services within the network nodes.
Regarding claim 5 Ma does not specifically disclose, further comprising:
restarting the validity timer based on measuring of the one or more of the plurality of connection parameters. However, Yoo teach, para. 119, “The control unit 707 may initiate a timer, or may detect an end of the timer. A component for each operation of the control unit 707 may be commands/codes resided in the control unit 707 at least temporarily or a storage space storing the commands/codes, or may be part of a circuity of the control unit 707”.
Ma and Yoo are analogous because they pertain to the field of wireless communication and, more specifically, to transmission parameters.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yoo which handles link failures in communications systems with several participant technologies in the system of Ma to select the relevant parameters for measurements according to the needs of the communication channel requirements. The motivation for doing so would have been to maintain the quality of services within the network nodes.
Regarding claim 7 Ma disclose, wherein the plurality of connection parameters comprise signal strength measurement parameters associated with the fallback secondary node and a signal quality associated with the fallback secondary node para. 10, “For example, these parameters may include a cell quality measurement result on the current SN, a cell quality measurement result on neighboring SNs, etc.”.
Regarding claims 18-19 the limitations of claims 18-19, respectively, are rejected in the same manner as analyzed above with respect to claims 4-5, respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Awada et al. (U.S. Pub. 20230036845) which disclose(s) fallback to conditional handover using SSB reference signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAUL RIVAS whose telephone number is (571)270–5590. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, from 8:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy K. Kundu, can be reached on (571) 272 - 8586. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571–272–8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, 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.
/R.R/ Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights