DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 25 August 2026 has been entered.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 25 August 2026, in view of the amendments with respect to claims 6 and 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(a) rejection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 25 August 2026 regarding the 103 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 5-6, 10-11, and 15-20, the applicant argued, “…neither Ericsson nor Matsumura teaches or suggests the newly claimed limitations regarding the serving cell identifier field…As shown in Matsumura's Figures 3A and 3B, Matsumura adds a discrete ‘Non-serving cell ID (3-bit)’ field to the payload alongside, not in place of, the existing ‘Serving Cell ID’ field. Alternatively, as shown in Figures 4A and 4B, Matsumura proposes adding a 7-bit bitmap to indicate the non-serving cells, again as an addition to, not a repurposing of, the ‘Serving cell ID’ field…” on pages 6-8.
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the above argument.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “repurposing the existing serving cell identifier field”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
On page 8 Ericsson clearly teaches the MAC CE signaling includes a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (page 8: the MAC CE is used to switch the association/switch the serving cell).
In ¶¶186-189 and 270 Matsumura clearly teaches the MAC CE signaling includes a first field indicating whether to change a serving cell (¶¶186 and 270: MAC CE includes a field indicating whether to change the serving cell) and a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (¶¶186-189: MAC CE includes “a field indicating a serving cell index/PCI/another ID (the above-mentioned new ID in option 2-3 or the like), or a field for a TCI state/SSB/CSI-RS for a target cell (changed serving cell)”). Matsumura defines a serving cell ID field of the MAC CE for indicating the target cell to facilitate implicit serving cell switching. This field is separate from the fields argued by the applicant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The limitations of claims 17-19 are included in base claim 16. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 5-6, 10-11, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson 3GPP R2-2105999 “On L1/L2 centric inter-cell mobility” (hereinafter referred to as “Ericsson”) in view of Matsumura et al. US 2024/0306053 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura”). Note: Ericsson was cited by the applicant in the IDS received 13 January 2025.
As to claim 1, Ericsson teaches a communication method performed by a terminal device or a component of a terminal device, comprising:
receiving, by the terminal device, second information, wherein the second information comprises configuration information of one or more candidate target cells (page 8: before receiving MAC CE indicating the switch, receive RRC configuration configuring other cell SSB/PCI and respective TCI states);
receiving first information, wherein the first information indicates to activate a first transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of a candidate target cell, the first information is media access control control element (MAC CE) signaling (page 8: receive, via MAC CE, to activate a TCI associated to a PCI other than the serving cell), and the MAC CE signaling includes a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (page 8: the MAC CE is used to switch the association/switch the serving cell); and
activating the first TCI state of the candidate target cell based on the first information (page 8: use MAC CE to activate the TCI state thereby switching serving cells), wherein there is an association relationship between the serving cell identifier field and a physical cell identifier (PCI) of the candidate target cell, wherein the association relationship is received by the terminal device by using a radio resource control (RRC) signaling (pages 8-9: UE receives RRC configuration including candidate cell ServCellIndex PCI information).
Although Ericsson teaches “A communication method…(MAC CE) signaling; and activating…(RRC) signaling,” Ericsson does not explicitly disclose “the MAC CE…serving cell” and “determining, based…the serving cell”.
However, Matsumura teaches the MAC CE signaling includes a first field indicating whether to change a serving cell (¶¶186 and 270: MAC CE includes a field indicating whether to change the serving cell) and a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (¶¶186-189: MAC CE includes “a field indicating a serving cell index/PCI/another ID (the above-mentioned new ID in option 2-3 or the like), or a field for a TCI state/SSB/CSI-RS for a target cell (changed serving cell)”); and
determining, based on the first field in the first information, whether to change the serving cell (¶¶186 and 270-271: judge, based on the field in the MAC CE, whether to change the serving cell).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in Ericsson by including “the MAC CE…serving cell” and “determining, based…the serving cell” as taught by Matsumura because it provides Ericsson’s method with the enhanced capability achieving more efficient beam management (Matsumura, ¶¶5-9, 186-187, and 270-271).
As to claim 5, Ericsson in view of Matsumura teaches the method according to claim 1. Ericsson further teaches wherein the configuration information comprises one or more of: a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI), a TCI state configuration, a synchronization broadcast signal block (SSB) receiving configuration, a random access channel (RACH) configuration, or serving cell configuration information (page 8: before receiving MAC CE indicating the switch, receive RRC configuration configuring other cell SSB/PCI and respective TCI states).
As to claim 6, Ericsson teaches a communication method performed by a network device or a component of a network device, comprising:
sending second information to a terminal device, wherein the second information comprises configuration information of one or more candidate target cells (page 8: before sending MAC CE to UE indicating the switch, send, to UE, RRC configuration configuring other cell SSB/PCI and respective TCI states);
generating first information, wherein the first information indicates to activate a first transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of a candidate target cell, the first information is media access control control element (MAC CE) signaling (page 8: generate MAC CE to activate a TCI associated to a PCI other than the serving cell), and the MAC CE signaling includes a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (page 8: the MAC CE is used to switch the association/switch the serving cell), wherein there is an association relationship between the serving cell identifier field and a physical cell identifier (PCI) of the candidate target cell, wherein the association relationship is received by the terminal device by using a radio resource control (RRC) signaling (pages 8-9: RRC configuration includes candidate cell ServCellIndex PCI information); and
sending the first information to the terminal device (page 8: transmit the MAC CE to a UE).
Although Ericsson teaches “A communication method…(MAC CE) signaling; and sending…terminal device,” Ericsson does not explicitly disclose “the MAC CE…serving cell” and “wherein the first…the serving cell”.
However, Matsumura teaches the MAC CE signaling includes a first field indicating whether to change a serving cell (¶¶186 and 270: MAC CE includes a field indicating whether to change the serving cell) and a serving cell identifier field that indicates the candidate target cell (¶¶186-189: MAC CE includes “a field indicating a serving cell index/PCI/another ID (the above-mentioned new ID in option 2-3 or the like), or a field for a TCI state/SSB/CSI-RS for a target cell (changed serving cell)”); and
wherein the first field in the first information is used by the terminal device to determine whether to change the serving cell (¶¶186 and 270-271: judge, based on the field in the MAC CE, whether to change the serving cell).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in Ericsson by including “the MAC CE…serving cell” and “wherein the first…the serving cell” as taught by Matsumura because it provides Ericsson’s method with the enhanced capability achieving more efficient beam management (Matsumura, ¶¶5-9, 186-187, and 270-271).
As to claim 10, Ericsson in view of Matsumura teaches the method according to claim 6. Ericsson further teaches wherein the configuration information comprises one or more of the following information: a cell radio network temporary identifier (C- RNTI), a TCI state configuration, a synchronization broadcast signal block (SSB) receiving configuration, a random access channel (RACH) configuration, or serving cell configuration information (page 8: before sending MAC CE to UE indicating the switch, send, to UE, RRC configuration configuring other cell SSB/PCI and respective TCI states).
As to claim 11, claim 11 is rejected the same way as claim 1.
As to claim 12, claim 12 is rejected the same way as claim 2.
As to claim 13, claim 13 is rejected the same way as claim 3.
As to claim 14, claim 14 is rejected the same way as claim 4.
As to claim 15, claim 15 is rejected the same way as claim 5.
As to claim 16, claim 16 is rejected the same way as claim 6.
As to claim 17, claim 17 is rejected the same way as claim 6.
As to claim 18, claim 18 is rejected the same way as claim 6.
As to claim 19, claim 19 is rejected the same way as claim 6.
As to claim 20, claim 20 is rejected the same way as claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN T VAN ROIE whose telephone number is (571)270-0308. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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.
/JUSTIN T VAN ROIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights