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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-20 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA :
- claims 1, 4, 8, 11, and 16 are amended
b. This is a final action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 03/12/2026.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claims 1-11 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), independent claims 1 and 8 have been amended according to the examiner's recommendation and thus the previous rejection of claims 1 and 8 and their respective dependent claims has been withdrawn.
Regarding Independent claims1, 8, and 12 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant's arguments, see “None of the art of record teach or suggest at least "the first message comprises the first RA report, first identification information, and second identification information, the first identification information indicates the source master access network device, and the second identification information indicates the source secondary access network device," as recited in independent claim 1 and similarly recited in independent claims 8 and 12.” on page 8, filed on 03/12/2026, with respect to CATT NPL "Further Consideration on the UE RACH Report for SN", 3GPP R2- 2100193, Jan 25 - Feb 5, 2021), in view of Kim (US Pub 2020/0413450), have been fully considered but are moot, over the limitations of “the source master access device and the target access network device are different devices”. Said limitations are newly added to the amended Claims 1, 8, and 12 and have been addressed in instant office action, as shown in section 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections below, with newly identified disclosure from previously applied reference Ramachandra et al. US Pub 2024/0215072, claiming provisional application 63068590 priority 2020-08-21 (hereinafter “Ramachandra”) in combination with previously applied reference Xu , thus rendering said Applicant’s arguments moot.
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)(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 1-4, 7-12, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ramachandra et al. US Pub 2024/0215072, claiming provisional application 63068590 priority 2020-08-21 (hereinafter “Ramachandra”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended)
Ramachandra discloses a communication method (“methods performed thereby, for providing one or more indications related to a random access procedure by the first node to a second cell, when served by a first cell, the second cell being a secondary cell” [0001]), comprising:
obtaining, by a terminal device (“any reference to a/the “UE”, a/the “wireless terminal”, a/the “user equipment”, or simply “UE”, “wireless terminal”, or “user equipment” may be understood to equally refer the first node 101” [0134]; Fig. 13), a first random access (RA) report (“Once a UE may have performed a RACH procedure, it may log a RACH report as part of a RACH report list and a network node may fetch it as part of a UE Information request and/or Response procedure” [0025]), wherein the first RA report comprises information about a random access procedure initiated by the terminal device (“a UE, may log the PSCell ID and its associated TAC if the SCell that the first node 101 performed the RACH procedure toward to, belongs to the SCG cells.” [0153]) to a source secondary access network device (“any reference to a/the “PSCell”, or simply “PSCell” may be understood to equally refer the third cell 123” [0134]; Fig. 13); and
after a master access network device (“any reference to a/the “PCell cell”, or simply “PCell” may be understood to equally refer the first cell 121” [0134]; Fig. 13) of the terminal device changes from a source master access network device to a target access network device (“In addition, depending on UE capabilities, Secondary Cells (SCells) (i.e. target access network device) may be configured to form together with the PCell (i.e. master access network device) a set of serving cells. The configured set of serving cells for a UE therefore may always consist of one PCell and one or more SCells. Further, when dual connectivity is configured, it may be the case that one carrier under the SCG may be used as the Primary SCell (PSCell). Hence, in this case there may be one PCell and one or more SCell(s) over the MCG and one PSCell and one or more SCell(s) over the SCG.” [0016]), sending, by the terminal device, a first message (exchanging RAR and msg4 as part of a “4-step RACH procedure” or a “2-step RACH procedure”) to the target access network device (“upon performing a 4-step RACH procedure on the second cell 122, 124, a secondary cell (SCell), the first node 101, e.g., a UE, may log: a) Physical cell identity (PCI) of the secondary cell, b) ARFCN of the secondary cell, c) Global Cell ID (CGI) and TAC (TAC) of the PCell, d) Global Cell ID (CGI) and TAC (TAC) of PSCell” [0163] and furthermore “upon performing a 2-step RACH procedure on the second cell 122, 124, a secondary cell (SCell), the first node 101, e.g., a UE, may log: a) Physical cell identity (PCI) of the secondary cell, b) ARFCN of the secondary cell, c) Global Cell ID (CGI) and TAC (TAC) of the PCell, d) Global Cell ID (CGI) and TAC (TAC) of PSCell” [0164]), wherein
the source master access device (“any reference to a/the “PCell cell”, or simply “PCell” may be understood to equally refer the first cell 121” [0134]; Fig. 13) and the target access network device are different devices (“any reference to a/the “secondary cell”, or simply “secondary cell”, a/the “SCell”, or simply “SCell” may be understood to equally refer the second cell 122, 124” [0134]; Fig. 13),
the first message comprises the first RA report (i.e. “RACH report”), first identification information, and second identification information (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]), the first identification information indicates the source master access network device (i.e. “PCell”), and the second identification information indicates the source secondary access network device (i.e. “Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID)”).
Regarding claim 2
Ramachandra previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Ramachandra further discloses wherein the first identification information comprises primary cell (PCell) information of the source master access network device, and the PCell information comprises at least one of a cell global identity (CGI) of a PCell, a tracking area code (TAC) of the PCell, a physical cell identifier (PCI) of the PCell, or frequency information (“the first node 101, e.g., UE, may be already required to read the CGI and TAC of the PCell and upon performing RCH toward a cell belonging to the MCG cells, it may log the PCell ID as part of a RACH report performed toward the SCell belonging to the MCG cells.” [0150]).
Regarding claim 3
Ramachandra previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Ramachandra further discloses wherein the first identification information (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]) is carried in the first message (exchanging RAR and msg4 as part of a “4-step RACH procedure” [0163] or a “2-step RACH procedure” [0164]) in a non-container form (i.e. via RRC message without additionally embedded payload “In LTE, the report of RACH information when a random access procedure is performed may be requested by the network via the UE Information procedure in RRC, see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, in the case where a RACH procedure was successful. That procedure is summarized in see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, as described in RRC specifications.” [0107]).
Regarding claim 4 (Currently Amended)
Ramachandra previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Ramachandra further discloses wherein the second identification information (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]) is carried in the first message (exchanging RAR and msg4 as part of a “4-step RACH procedure” [0163] or a “2-step RACH procedure” [0164]) in a non-container form (i.e. via RRC message without additionally embedded payload “In LTE, the report of RACH information when a random access procedure is performed may be requested by the network via the UE Information procedure in RRC, see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, in the case where a RACH procedure was successful. That procedure is summarized in see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, as described in RRC specifications.” [0107]).
Regarding claim 7
Ramachandra previously discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
Ramachandra further discloses the target access network device (“any reference to a/the “secondary cell”, or simply “secondary cell”, a/the “SCell”, or simply “SCell” may be understood to equally refer the second cell 122, 124” [0134]; Fig. 13) and the source master access network device (“any reference to a/the “PCell cell”, or simply “PCell” may be understood to equally refer the first cell 121” [0134]; Fig. 13) are different access network devices (see Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended)
Ramachandra discloses a terminal device (“any reference to a/the “UE”, a/the “wireless terminal”, a/the “user equipment”, or simply “UE”, “wireless terminal”, or “user equipment” may be understood to equally refer the first node 101” [0134]), comprising:
at least one processor (“processor 1705” in Fig. 17; [0289]); and
one or more memories (“memory 1706” in Fig. 17; [0289]) including computer instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to perform operations comprising:
obtaining a first random access (RA) report, wherein the first RA report comprises information about a random access procedure initiated by the terminal device to a source secondary access network device; and
after a master access network device of the terminal device changes from a source master access network device to a target access network device, sending a first message to the target access network device, wherein
the source master access device and the target access network device are different devices,
the first message comprises the first RA report, ]first identification information, and second identification information, the first identification information indicates the source master access network device, and the second identification information indicates the source secondary access network device (as afore-mentioned in claim 1 discussion).
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 8 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 8 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 9
The terminal device according to claim 8, wherein the first identification information comprises primary cell (PCell) information of the source master access network device, and the PCell information comprises at least one of a cell global identity (CGD) of a PCell, a tracking area code (TAC) of the PCell, a physical cell identifier (PCI) of the PCell, or frequency information.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 9 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 2. Therefore apparatus claim 9 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 10
The terminal device according to claim 8, wherein
the first identification information is carried in the first message in a non-container form.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 10 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 3. Therefore apparatus claim 10 corresponds to method claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Regarding claim 11 (Currently Amended)
The terminal device according to claim 8, wherein the second identification information is carried in the first message in a non-container form.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 11 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 4. Therefore apparatus claim 10 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 12 (Currently Amended)
Ramachandra discloses a target access network device (“second node 102” in Fig. 18; [0316]), comprising:
at least one processor (“processor 1804” in Fig. 18; [0316]); and
one or more memories (“memory 1805” in Fig. 18; [0316]) including computer instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the target access network device to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first message (exchanging RAR and msg4 as part of a “4-step RACH procedure” [0163] or a “2-step RACH procedure” [0164]) from a terminal device (“any reference to a/the “UE”, a/the “wireless terminal”, a/the “user equipment”, or simply “UE”, “wireless terminal”, or “user equipment” may be understood to equally refer the first node 101” [0134]; Fig. 13), wherein the first message comprises a first random access (RA) report (“Once a UE may have performed a RACH procedure, it may log a RACH report as part of a RACH report list and a network node may fetch it as part of a UE Information request and/or Response procedure” [0025]), first identification information, and second identification information, the first RA report comprises information about a random access procedure initiated by the terminal device to a source secondary access network device (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]), the first identification information indicates a source master access network device (i.e. “PCell”), and the second identification information indicates the source secondary access network device (i.e. “Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID)”); and
sending the first RA report to the source secondary access network device through the source master access network device (“a UE, may log the PSCell ID and its associated TAC if the SCell that the first node 101 performed the RACH procedure toward to, belongs to the SCG cells.” [0153]).
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended)
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12,
Ramachandra further discloses wherein the second identification information (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]) is carried in the first message (exchanging RAR and msg4 as part of a “4-step RACH procedure” [0163] or a “2-step RACH procedure” [0164]) in a non-container form (i.e. via RRC message without additionally embedded payload “In LTE, the report of RACH information when a random access procedure is performed may be requested by the network via the UE Information procedure in RRC, see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, in the case where a RACH procedure was successful. That procedure is summarized in see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, as described in RRC specifications.” [0107]); and the operations further comprise:
sending to the source master access network device (“any reference to a/the “PCell cell”, or simply “PCell” may be understood to equally refer the first cell 121” [0134]; Fig. 13) the second identification information (“a method for including the PCell and Primary Secondary Cell Identity (PSCell ID) in a RACH Report.” [0110]) carried in the non-container form (i.e. via RRC message without additionally embedded payload “In LTE, the report of RACH information when a random access procedure is performed may be requested by the network via the UE Information procedure in RRC, see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, in the case where a RACH procedure was successful. That procedure is summarized in see 3GPP TS 36.331, v. 16.0.0, section 5.6.5, as described in RRC specifications.” [0107]).
Regarding claim 17
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein the first identification information comprises primary cell (PCell) information of the source master access network device, and the PCell information comprises at least one of a cell global identity (CGI) of a PCell, a tracking area code (TAC) of the PCell, a physical cell identifier (PCI) of the PCell, or frequency information.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 17 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 9. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to apparatus claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 9 rejection above.
Regarding claim 18
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein
the first identification information is carried in the first message in a non-container form.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 18 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 10. Therefore apparatus claim 18 corresponds to apparatus claim 10 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 10 rejection above.
Regarding claim 19
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein the sending the first RA report to the source secondary access network device through the source master access network device comprises:
sending, to the source secondary access network device through the source master access network device, the first RA report carried in a container form.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 19 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 11. Therefore apparatus claim 19 corresponds to apparatus claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 11 rejection above.
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.
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.
Claim 5, 6, 13-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramachandra, and in view of Xu et al. US Pub 2021/0029606 (hereinafter “Xu”).
Regarding claim 5
Ramachandra previously discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein before the sending, by the terminal device, a first message to the target access network device,
Ramachandra does not specifically teach the method further comprises: receiving, by the terminal device, first indication information from the target access network device, wherein the first indication information indicates to the terminal device to report information about a random access procedure on a secondary access network device side.
In an analogous art, Xu discloses the method further comprises: receiving, by the terminal device (i.e. “UE” in Fig. 9), first indication information (“After the step 903, the S-SeNB simultaneously transmits the downlink data to the UE and forwards the downlink data to the T-SeNB. Therefore, a part of the forwarded data received from the S-SeNB by the T-SeNB may be already received by the UE” [0360]; Fig. 9) from the target access network device (i.e. “T-SeNB” in Fig. 9), wherein the first indication information indicates to the terminal device to report information about a random access procedure (“Step 907: The UE is synchronized to the T-SeNB” [0355]; Fig. 9) on a secondary access network device side (i.e. “S-SeNB” in Fig. 9).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports, to include Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover, so that the waste of resources and the power consumption can be reduced, and the missing and duplication transmission of data can be avoided (Xu [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover into Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 6
Ramachandra, as modified by Xu, previously discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein before the receiving, by the terminal device, first indication information from the target access network device, the method further comprises:
Xu further discloses sending, by the terminal device (i.e. “UE” in Fig. 9), second indication information (“According to the uplink receive status received from the T-SeNB and in combination with the data transmitted at the S-SeNB by the UE and the feedback received from the S-SeNB, the UE transmits uplink data to the T-SeNB” [0376]) to the target access network device (i.e. “T-SeNB” in Fig. 9), wherein the second indication information indicates that the terminal device has the information about the random access procedure (“Step 907: The UE is synchronized to the T-SeNB” [0355]; Fig. 9) on the secondary access network device side (i.e. “S-SeNB” in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 13
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein
Ramachandra does not specifically teach the first RA report is carried in a second message sent by the target access network device to the source master access network device.
In an analogous art, Xu discloses the first RA report is carried in a second message (step 602 in Fig. 6) sent by the target access network device (“T-SeNB” in Fig. 6) to the source master access network device (“MeNB” in Fig. 6).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports, to include Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover, so that the waste of resources and the power consumption can be reduced, and the missing and duplication transmission of data can be avoided (Xu [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover into Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 14
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein
Ramachandra does not specifically teach the first RA report is carried in a third message sent by the target access network device to a core network device.
In an analogous art, Xu further discloses the first RA report is carried in a third message (step 707 in Fig. 7) sent by the target access network device (“T-SeNB” in Fig. 7) to a core network device (“MME” in Fig. 7).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports, to include Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover, so that the waste of resources and the power consumption can be reduced, and the missing and duplication transmission of data can be avoided (Xu [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Xu’s method for supporting seamless handover into Ramachandra’s method for handling RACH reports since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 15
Ramachandra, as modified by Xu, previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 14, wherein
Xu further discloses the third message further comprises target identification information, the target identification information comprises at least one of the first identification information or third identification information, and the third identification information is an identifier of the source master access network device that is determined based on the first identification information (“Step 610: By the MeNB, the data transmission stopping indication is transmitted to the S-SeNB. The message for transmitting the data transmission stopping indication contains an eNB UE X2AP ID allocated for the UE by the MeNB and an eNB UE X2AP ID allocated for the S-SeNB by the MeNB.” [0269]).
Regarding claim 20
Ramachandra previously discloses the target access network device according to claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise:
before receiving a first message from a terminal device, sending first indication information to the terminal device, wherein the first indication information indicates to the terminal device to report information about a random access procedure on a secondary access network device side.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 20 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 5. Therefore apparatus claim 20 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights