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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 112, second paragraph as being indefinite for failing to particularly point and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention
In claim 1, the tern(s) "a plurality of gears”, is/are not clear what these are in reference to. Also, the description of the present claim limitation fails to provide a clear and complete description on the invention. Therefore, the corresponding technical means in the present invention is unclear, and consequently, have no well-defined meaning for the skilled person and do not comprise any inherent features which can be derived from the wording of these terms as such. However, the claims will be given a broad reasonable interpretation for the purposes of examination as best understood.
Claims 2-20 are rejected for similar reasons as stated for claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MURUGAN US 20240187982 in view of Hwang US 20190174406
1. A method for wireless communication, comprising:
judging a plurality of service types for a plurality of cells (MURUGAN: [0064-0068, 0081] determine list of features or cell types (e.g., CSG, NSA, HST, etc.)), [[wherein some of the plurality of cells correspond to more than one service types]];
judging a plurality of gears for each of the plurality of service types (MURUGAN: [0010, 0064-0068, 0070, 0081] adaptively (i.e., identify) prioritize different features or cell types for different regions, different OEMs, different operators), wherein the plurality of gears for each of the plurality of service types include different levels of successfully achieving the plurality of service types (MURUGAN: Table 1, 4 [0081] For example, a frequency (e.g., F1) may have three cells, Cell A, Cell B and Cell C, in which cell A supports eMBMS; cell B does not support eMBMS support but is a high bandwidth cell; and cell C does not support eMBMS support and is not a high bandwidth cell…);
obtaining a customization favor setting including a plurality of preferred orders for the plurality of service types (MURUGAN: [0064-0068, 0081] provide a list of features or cell types (e.g., CSG, NSA, HST, etc.) that the UE 115-a is to use for ordering cells (e.g., in decreasing order of priority));
obtaining a plurality of weighted priority values for the plurality of cells according to the plurality of service types and the customization favor setting including the plurality of preferred orders for the plurality of service types (MURUGAN: [0065-0068, 0081] for each cell that meets the measurement threshold RSRP value, the cell features from the FPL may be used to determine a relative priority order for each cel);
obtaining a plurality of weighted signal quality values for the plurality of cells according to the plurality of service types, the plurality of gears for each of the plurality of service types and the customization favor setting (MURUGAN: [0010, 0065-0068, 0070, 0081] monitor (i.e., determine) for one or more SIBs transmitted that indicate a cell type, cell features, or combinations);
in an idle mode, triggering mobility via cell reselection which uses the plurality of weighted priority values or the plurality of weighted signal quality values (MURUGAN: [0074] Based on the FPL 330 and one or more idle mode measurements, such as measurements of reference signals 320, the UE 115-b may determine to trigger cell reselection and perform subsequent communications with the second base station 105-d); and
in a connected mode, triggering mobility via measurement reports which are generated based on the plurality of weighted signal quality values (MURUGAN: [0081] prioritize including preferred cells in the measurement report 625 so that connected mode mobility/handover or network triggered redirection happens to a preferred cell).
MURUGAN merely teaches “wherein some of the plurality of cells correspond to more than one service types”
Hwang teaches wherein some of the plurality of cells correspond to more than one service types (Hwang: fig. 3-4, [0068] first base station 120 that supports the first service and the second service), wherein the plurality of gears for each of the plurality of service types include different levels of successfully achieving the plurality of service types (Hwang: table 1 [0072-0073, 0078, 0080, 0095, 0138, 0146] e.g., check at the first frequency (frequency 1) whether a cell supports all the services (slices) of the UE, in the order of the best cell, the second best cell, and the third best cell)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into MURUGAN’s invention in order to provide a method for a terminal to (re)select a cell in an RRC idle mode or an RRC connected mode, as taught by Hwang.
2. The method for wireless communication according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of weighted values for the plurality of service types are determined according to the plurality of preferred orders (MURUGAN: [0121] priority order for each cell).
3. The method for wireless communication according to claim 2, wherein the plurality of weighted priority values for the plurality of cells are obtained based on the plurality of weighted values (MURUGAN: [0073] priority in accordance with FPL values as in Table 1-3).
4. The method for wireless communication according to claim 2, wherein the plurality of weighted values are different (MURUGAN: [0073] priority in accordance with FPL values as in Table 1-3 reselection algorithm).
5. The method for wireless communication according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of cell offset collections for the plurality of service types are determined (MURUGAN: [0067, 0073] frequency offset can be used to prioritize preferred cells).
6. The method for wireless communication according to claim 5, wherein a plurality of cell offsets in each of the plurality of cell offset collections are determined based on the plurality of gears for each of the plurality of service types (MURUGAN: [0067, 0073] frequency offset can be used to prioritize preferred cells).
7. The method for wireless communication according to claim 6, wherein a plurality of weighted values for the plurality of service types are determined according to the plurality of preferred orders (MURUGAN: Table 1-3 reselection algorithm).
8. The method for wireless communication according to claim 7, wherein the plurality of weighted values are decremental based on the plurality of preferred orders (MURUGAN: 0065-0067, 0081] Table 1-3 - ordering cells (e.g., in decreasing order of priority)).
9. The method for wireless communication according to claim 7, wherein the plurality of weighted signal quality values for the plurality of cells are obtained based on the plurality of cell offsets and the plurality of weighted values (MURUGAN: [0067, 0073] frequency offset can be used to prioritize preferred cells).
10. The method for wireless communication according to claim 6, wherein the plurality of weighted values are different (MURUGAN: table 1-4 reselection algorithm).
Regarding claims 11-20, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-10, where the difference used is a “wireless modem device” with a controller(s) (MURUGAN: Referring to FIG. 9, unit 900) and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims arid interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Remark:
The examiner stresses that the claims are too broad and require detail or specialization of the steps as recited in the claims. Alone and as claimed, the limitations are too open.
Examiner has cited particular portions of the references as applied to each claim limitation for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Regarding all other arguments presented by applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the Examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
In addition, an interview could expedite the prosecution.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sulaiman Nooristany whose telephone number is 571-270-1929. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday: 8:30am to 5:00pm (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR 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.
/SULAIMAN NOORISTANY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights