CTFR 18/505,681 CTFR 99381 DETAILED ACTION The amendments and remarks filed 3/5/2026 were received. PRIOR ART The following references are prior art: 1. US 2021/0136638 A1 (“Pala”) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) since it published on May 6, 2021 before August 5, 2021 the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 2. Appl. No.: 18/577,333 (“Futa”) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) since it was published as US 2024/0244493 A1, names another inventor (Hisashi Futaki for NEC Corporation), and was effectively filed Jul. 14, 2021 (see JP Appl. No. 2021-116603) before August 5, 2021 the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 3. (11/09/2023 IDS) 2020/0396661 (“Wu”) is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) since it published on Dec. 17, 2020 before August 5, 2021 the effective filing date of the claimed invention. CLAIM REJECTIONS — 35 U.S.C. 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07 AIA 07-07-aia 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: 35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty. (a) NOVELTY; PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless— 07-08-aia AIA (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, 10-12, 16 & 19 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3, 10-12, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Pala (US 2021/0136638 A1) for the reasons given below . Claim 1 With respect to claim 1, Pala disclosed: A method for wireless communication comprising: receiving, by a master node (“MN”) from a source secondary node, a request for a secondary node (“SN”) change, wherein the request comprises candidate cell information for one or more target SNs ([0116] For conditional PSCell addition and/or change, various options exist for supporting SN initiated SN change. In some aspects, for SN changes triggered by the SN, the SN may identify a set of one or more PSCells which may be configured as candidate cells. [0117] As shown in the first option illustrated by FIG. 9, the SN may identify a set of one or more PSCells which may be configured as candidate cells. [0119] Based on the received measurement report, the SN may decide which of the candidate cells to configure as a new PSCell for the UE 120 (e.g., CSN1 and CSN2, in this example). After identifying a set of candidate cells for a SN list, the SN 110a may initiate a conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 2, in an XN message, a candidate SN add list which includes both [first candidate secondary node] CSN1 and [second candidate secondary node] CSN2.); sending, by the MN to at least one of the target SNs, a SN addition request based on the candidate cell information ([0120] As illustrated, the MN 110b may perform the SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. At step 3, MN 110b may transmit a first conditional SN addition message (e.g., SN addition request to CSN1) to initiate a first conditional SN addition procedure with CSN1.); receiving, by the MN from the at least one target SN, at least one candidate cell configuration for the at least one target SN ([0129] FIG. 10 illustrates a second call flow diagram 1000 illustrating example communications between a UE, a MN, and a SN, in accordance with various aspects of the present disclosure. [0131] Unlike the example shown in FIG. 9, the SN 110a in FIG. 10 may also determine execution criteria for the candidate cells and signal information regarding the execution criteria to the MN 110b. [0134] In some examples, according to a second option, as illustrated in step 2 of FIG. 10, the SN 110a may include the conditional SN change execution criteria in an SN to MN transparent container, such that MN 110b may alter it. [FIG. 10] 2. SN/SgNB CHANGE REQUIRED (CONDITIONAL SN CHANGE, CANDIDATES SN ADD LIS: CSN1, CSN2, SN TO MN TRANSPARENT CONTAINER: CONDITIONAL SN CHANGE INTO – EXECUTION CONDITIONS. The Examiner notes that FIG. 9 and 10 illustrate similar embodiments that are different as described in [0131]: whether the MN or the SN determine the execution conditions, where description of FIG. 9 also applies to FIG. 10 as appropriate.); and sending, by the MN to a user equipment (“UE”), a radio resource control (“RRC”) message with the at least one candidate cell configuration and one or more execution conditions for each candidate cell configuration to cause a change from the S-SN to the at least one target SN based on the at least one candidate cell configuration when the one or more execution conditions for one of the candidate cell configurations from the target SN are met, wherein the RRC message comprises an indication for at least one of the candidate cell configuration to indicate whether the indicated candidate cell configuration is maintained after completion of a handover, a primary secondary cell, PSCell, addition, or a PSCell change procedure ([0071] At 425, source BS 110-1 may provide the configuration for the handover procedure to the UE 120. For example, the handover configuration may include a configuration for a handover procedure that utilizes or does not utilize the indicated capability of the UE 120. In some aspects, the handover configuration may indicate that a make-before-break (MBB) handover procedure and/or a DC-based MBB handover procedure be performed. Thus, the configuration may indicate to the UE 120 whether to maintain the radio link connection to the source BS 110-1 while, and/or after, a radio link connection to the target BS 110-2 is established. [0083] In some aspects, CU 502 may select an enhanced MBB handover procedure for UE 120 based at least in part on the UE's 120 indication of a simultaneous transmit and receive capability. [0087] At 530, the source BS 110-1 sends an RRC reconfiguration to UE 120. In some aspects, the RRC reconfiguration may include information identifying target BS 110-2, information identifying a handover configuration, and/or any other suitable information. In some examples, the RRC reconfiguration may include information indicating that the UE 120 is to perform an enhanced MBB handover procedure with target BS 110-2 using a simultaneous transmit and receive capability ofUE 120. In such a case, the UE 120 may determine that it is capable of maintaining a connection with source BS 110-1 while establishing a connection with target BS 110-2. [0090] At 545, target BS 110-2 may transmit a UL RRC transfer to CU 502. In some examples, the UL RRC transfer may indicate the RRC reconfiguration is complete. Accordingly, in some aspects, based at least in part on receiving the indication that the RRC reconfiguration is complete, CU 502 may determine a handover completion configuration. For example, when making a completion determination, CU 502 may utilize and/or configure one or more thresholds for one or more measurement parameters to perform a handover completion procedure (e.g., to release source BS 110-1). Furthermore, in some aspects, after the RRC reconfiguration is complete, UE 120 may perform uplink user/control plane duplication with source BS 110-1 and CU 502. For example, control plane data may be duplicated and shared between BS 110-1 and CU 502. Furthermore, in some aspects, after the CU 502 determines the RRC reconfiguration is complete, the CU 502 may send DL user data to the UE120 via target BS 110-2, while also continuing to send DL user/control plane duplication to the UE 120 via source BS 110-1. [0106] As described herein, the CHO procedure may be implemented for secondary node (SN) addition or change procedures and may reduce the delays involved in SN addition or change in dual-connectivity scenarios. [0107] For conditional primary secondary cell (PSCell) change, various scenarios for SN change may include mast node (MN) initiated SN change and SN-initiated SN change. As the name implies, in MN-initiated SN change, generally, the MN decides the execution criteria in addition to which PSCells may be configured as candidate PSCells, and performs an SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. Alternatively, in SN-initiated SN change, generally the SN decides which PSCells may be configured as candidate PSCells, and performs an SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. In some cases, SN-initiated SN change may involve the SN determining the execution criteria. [0122] the execution criteria provides the criteria by which execution of the addition or change ( e.g., HO) of a particular one of CSN1 110b or CSN2 110c is to be performed. [0131] The MN 110b may include the execution criteria in the RRC Reconfiguration message sent to the UE 120, at step 7. [0124] At step 7, the MN 100b may transmit the execution conditions (e.g. execution criteria) and the candidate SN list to the UE 120 in an RRC configuration message (e.g., "RRC Reconfiguration message" for NR) to the UE 120. In some examples, the RRC configuration message may configure the UE 120 for multiple candidate SNs in a single message. For example, the RRC configuration message may include configuration information for both CSN1 and. In some examples the RRC configuration message may include one or more of: (i) source cell RRC configuration changes (if any), (ii) conditional SN addition or change execution criteria for each candidate cell in the set (configured by MN 110b), and/or (iii) RRC reconfiguration for each CSN. [0125] Following receipt of the RRC configuration message, the UE 120 may monitor for conditions to change PSCell, based on the configuration received from the MN.). Claim 2 With respect to claim 2, Pala disclosed: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the candidate cell information for the one or more target SNs comprises one or more candidate primary secondary cell (“PSCell”) identification information for each of the target SNs and comprises one or more execution conditions for each of the candidate PSCells ([0107] For conditional primary secondary cell (PSCell) change, various scenarios for SN change may include mast node (MN) initiated SN change and SN-initiated SN change. [0117] As shown in the first option illustrated by FIG. 9, the SN may identify a set of one or more PSCells which may be configured as candidate cells while the MN determines the execution criteria for the candidate cells. [0119] After identifying a set of candidate cells for a SN list, the SN 110a may initiate a conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 2, in an XN message, a candidate SN add list which includes both CSN1 and CSN2. [0131] Unlike the example shown in FIG. 9, the SN 110a in FIG. 10 may also determine execution criteria for the candidate cells and signal information regarding the execution criteria to the MN 110b. [0132] In some examples, the RRC message may include the execution criteria configuration for each candidate cell in a transparent container. The Examiner notes that FIG. 9 and 10 illustrate similar embodiments that are different as described in [0131]: whether the MN or the SN determine the execution conditions, where description of FIG. 9 also applies to FIG. 10 as appropriate.). Claim 3 With respect to claim 3, Pala disclosed: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the source SN provides measurement results of one or more cells in the at least one target SN, and wherein the measurement results for each cell include an indicator for whether the cell is a candidate PSCell ([0115] The measurement events used to trigger a PSCell addition and/or a PSCell change may differ based on the type of dual connectivity architecture. Moreover, measurement events may be independently configured by the MN 110a and the SN. Thus, the conditional PSCell addition/change RRC message has to support configuring separate execution criteria configuration for each PSCell of a plurality of PSCells to allow the UE 120 to perform PSCell addition and/or PSCell change.). Claim 10 Claim 10 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 11 Claim 11 recites limitations similar to claim 2 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 12 Claim 12 recites limitations similar to claim 3 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 16 With respect to claim 16, Pala disclosed: The method of claim 10 (see rejection above), wherein the RRC message comprises an indication for each candidate cell configuration to indicate whether the candidate cell configuration is maintained after completion of the change from the source SN to the at least one target SN ([0131] Unlike the example shown in FIG. 9, the SN 110a in FIG. 10 may also determine execution criteria for the candidate cells and signal information regarding the execution criteria to the MN 110b. The MN 110b may include the execution criteria in the RRC Reconfiguration message sent to the UE 120, at step 7. [0132] In some examples, the RRC message may include the execution criteria configuration for each candidate cell in a transparent container. [0133] In some examples, according to a first option, the MN 110b may be allowed to modify the execution criteria in the Xnmessage from the SN 110a to the MN 110b. Thus, the RRC message transmitted by the MN 110b to the UE 120 may signal information regarding the candidate cells and the modified execution criteria (similar to the option shown in FIG. 9). [0135] In some examples where the UE is configured with conditional SN change configurations from both the MN 110b and SN 110a, the UE 120 may monitor both configurations independently. [0136] In some aspects, after executing an SN change to a new SN (e.g., CSN1 or CSN2), the UE 120 may stop monitoring the execution conditions (e.g., criteria) configured by the old SN 110a. In such cases, the UE 120 may notify the MN 110b about the change of SN (e.g., via an RRC reconfiguration complete message).). Claim 19 Claim 19 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning . CLAIM REJECTIONS — 35 U.S.C. 103 07-20-aia AIA 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: 35 U.S.C. 103 Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter. 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. CLAIMS 6, 7, 14, & 15 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6, 7, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pala (US 2021/0136638 A1) . Claim 6 With respect to claim 6, Pala taught: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the request for the SN change comprises at least one of an indication to indicate a SN change from the at least one target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed, or an indication to indicate a SN change from th eat least one target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed ([0119] Based on the received measurement report, the SN may decide which of the candidate cells to configure as a new PSCell for the UE 120 (e.g., CSN1 and CSN2, in this example). After identifying a set of candidate cells for a SN list, the SN 110a may initiate a conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 2, in an XN message, a candidate SN add list which includes both CSN1 and CSN2. [0124] At step 7, the MN 100b may transmit the execution conditions (e.g. execution criteria) and the candidate SN list to the UE 120 in an RRC configuration message ( e.g., "RRC Reconfiguration message" for NR) to the UE 120. In some examples, the RRC configuration message may configure the UE 120 for multiple candidate SNs in a single message. For example, the RRC configuration message may include configuration information for both CSN1 and. In some examples the RRC configuration message may include one or more of: (i) source cell RRC configuration changes (if any), (ii) conditional SN addition or change execution criteria for each candidate cell in the set ( configured by MN 110b), and/or (iii) RRC reconfiguration for each CSN. [0125] Following receipt of the RRC configuration message, the UE 120 may monitor for conditions to change PSCell, based on the configuration received from the MN. [0126] For example, the UE 120 may determine whether the quality of a neighbor cell is greater than a threshold of an execution criteria that MN 110b sent to the UE 120. If the UE 120 determines that the quality is greater than the threshold, then the execution criteria is met. For CHO, instead of the UE 120 sending the measurement report to the MN 110b (which may be forwarded to the SN 110a ), the UE may determine that the execution criteria ( e.g., the B1 event criteria or A3/A5 event criteria) for the candidate PSCell is met, and the UE 120 may perform the handover to the candidate PSCell.). The Examiner finds that claim 6 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 because it would be achieved as a result of implementing Pala’s techniques. Specifically, the Examiner finds that implementing Pala’s technique of continuously monitoring conditions of the candidate secondary node for conditional SN change and then preforming SN change means that Pala’s system is configured such that the “ request for the SN change comprises at least one of an indication to indicate a SN change from the target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed, or an indication to indicate a SN change from the target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed .” In other words, because Pala’s system enables “ a SN change from the target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN ” or “ a SN change from the target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN ” by virtue of continuous monitoring of the candidate cells (where the original source SN could then become a candidate after the SN changes), this means that the request for the SN change in Pala “ comprises at least one of an indication to indicate ” this SN change given the plain meaning of “indication” (i.e., a sign or piece of information that indicates/points out/shows something). Claim 7 With respect to claim 7, Pala taught: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the SN addition request comprises at least one of an indication to indicate a SN change from the at least one target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed, or an indication to indicate a SN change from the at least one target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed ([0118] Before and during the triggering event, the UE 120 may monitor neighboring cells. In the example of FIG. 9, the neighboring cells may include a first candidate secondary node (CSN1) and a second candidate secondary node (CSN2) (e.g., BS 110c and BS 110d, respectively). In response to the triggering event, the UE 120 may transmit, at step 1, to the MN 110b, configured for measurements, a measurement report identifying the CSNl and CSN2. Subsequently, MN 110b may forward the measurement report to SN 110a. The measurement report may be generated by the UE 120, and may indicate to the MN 110b and SN 110a that the UE 120 is requesting a CHO to a new or additional SN. [0119] Based on the received measurement report, the SN may decide which of the candidate cells to configure as a new PSCell for the UE 120 (e.g., CSN1 and CSN2, in this example). After identifying a set of candidate cells for a SN list, the SN 110a may initiate a conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 2, in an XN message, a candidate SN add list which includes both CSN1 and CSN2. [0124] At step 7, the MN 100b may transmit the execution conditions (e.g. execution criteria) and the candidate SN list to the UE 120 in an RRC configuration message (e.g., "RRC Reconfiguration message" for NR) to the UE 120. In some examples, the RRC configuration message may configure the UE 120 for multiple candidate SNs in a single message. For example, the RRC configuration message may include configuration information for both CSN1 and. In some examples the RRC configuration message may include one or more of: (i) source cell RRC configuration changes (if any), (ii) conditional SN addition or change execution criteria for each candidate cell in the set (configured by MN 110b), and/or (iii) RRC reconfiguration for each CSN. [0125] Following receipt of the RRC configuration message, the UE 120 may monitor for conditions to change PSCell, based on the configuration received from the MN. [0126] For example, the UE 120 may determine whether the quality of a neighbor cell is greater than a threshold of an execution criteria that MN 110b sent to the UE 120. If the UE 120 determines that the quality is greater than the threshold, then the execution criteria is met. For CHO, instead of the UE 120 sending the measurement report to the MN 110b (which may be forwarded to the SN 110a ), the UE may determine that the execution criteria (e.g., the B1 event criteria or A3/A5 event criteria) for the candidate PSCell is met, and the UE 120 may perform the handover to the candidate PSCell.). The Examiner finds that claim 7 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 because it would be achieved as a result of implementing Pala’s techniques. Specifically, the Examiner finds that implementing Pala’s technique of continuously monitoring conditions of the candidate secondary node for conditional SN change and then preforming SN change means that Pala’s system is configured such that “ the SN addition request comprises at least one of an indication to indicate a SN change from the target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed, or an indication to indicate a SN change from the target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN is allowed .” In other words, because Pala’s system enables “ a SN change from the target SN back to the source SN after execution of a SN change to one target SN ” or “ a SN change from the target SN to other target SNs after execution of a SN change to one target SN ” by virtue of continuous monitoring of the candidate cells (where the original source SN could then become a candidate after the SN changes), this means that the SN addition request of Pala “ comprises at least one of an indication to indicate ” this SN change given the plain meaning of “indication” (i.e., a sign or piece of information that indicates/points out/shows something). Claim 14 Claim 14 recites limitations similar to claim 6 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 15 Claim 15 recites limitations similar to claim 7 and is rejected by the same reasoning. CLAIMS 4, 8, 9, 13, 17, 18, & 20 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 8, 9, 13, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pala (US 2021/0136638 A1) in view of Futa (US 2024/0244493 A1) . Claim 4 With respect to claim 4, Pala taught: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the MN provides information suggested by the source SN to the at least one target SN ([0002] Aspects of the present disclosure relate to wireless communications. [0107] For conditional primary secondary cell (PSCell) change, various scenarios for SN change may include mast node (MN) initiated SN change and SN-initiated SN change. As the name implies, in MN-initiated SN change, generally, the MN decides the execution criteria in addition to which PSCells may be configured as candidate PSCells, and performs an SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. Alternatively, in SN-initiated SN change, generally the SN decides which PSCells may be configured as candidate PSCells, and performs an SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. [0117] FIG. 9 illustrates a first call flow 900 diagram illustrating example communications between a UE, a MN, and a SN, in accordance with various aspects of the present disclosure. As shown in the first option illustrated by FIG. 9, the SN may identify a set of one or more PSCells. [0119] the candidate cells to configure as a new PSCell for the UE 120 (e.g., CSN1 and CSN2, in this example). After identifying a set of candidate cells for a SN list, the SN 110a may initiate a conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 2, in an XN message, a candidate SN add list which includes both CSN1 and CSN2. [0120] As illustrated, the MN 110b may perform the SN addition procedure with the candidate SNs. At step 3, MN 110b may transmit a first conditional SN addition message (e.g., SN addition request to CSN1) to initiate a first conditional SN addition procedure with CSN1. [0121] At step 5, MN 110b may transmit a second conditional SN addition message (e.g., SN addition request to CSN2) to initiate a second conditional SN addition procedure with CSN2.). Pala taught the limitations of claim 4 above, and taught a SN addition message, but failed to explicitly teach that information suggested by the source SN and provided to the target SN by the MN was “ one or more candidate PSCells identification information .” With respect to claim 4, Futaki taught: the MN provides one or more candidate PSCells identification information suggested by the source SN to the target SN ([Abstract] A target Secondary Node (T-SN) (4) indicates to a Master Node (MN) (1), in a response message to a request for an inter-SN Conditional PSCell Change (CPC), whether or not all of candidate PSCells suggested by the MN (1) or a source SN (S-SN) (2) have been accepted. [0117] FIG. 13 shows an example of the operation of the MN 1, S-SN 2, T-SN 4, and UE 3 with respect to an SN-initiated inter-SN CPC. In step 1301, the S-SN 2 initiates an inter-SN CPC procedure by sending an SN Change Required message (e.g., SgNB Change Required or S-NODE Change Required) to the MN 1. In this message, the S-SN 2 indicates the CPC initiation to the MN 1. This message contains the identifier of the T-SN 4. This message further contains a CPC execution condition. The MN 1 may or may not be able to comprehend the CPC execution condition set by the S-SN 2. [0118] In step 1302, the MN 1 requests the T-SN 4 to allocate resources for the UE 3 using an SN Addition procedure. Specifically, the MN 1 sends an SN Addition Request message (e.g., SgNB Addition Request or S-NODE Addition Request) to the T-SN 4. In this message, the MN 1 may indicate the CPC initiation to the T-SN 4 and provide the T-SN 4 with an upper limit of candidate PSCells. [0119] In step 1303, the T-SN 4 sends to the MN 1, via an SN Addition Request Acknowledge message, the PSCell ID(s) of the one or more candidate PSCells that have been accepted ( or prepared). In addition, the T-SN 4 sends the PSCell configuration ( or SCG configuration) of each accepted candidate PSCell to the MN 1 via the SN Addition Request Acknowledge message.) The Examiner finds that it 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 to incorporate Futa’s SN addition request message information in Pala’s SN addition request message since doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)). Specifically, the Examiner finds that the prior art (i.e., Pala and Futa) included each element claimed as discussed above, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (i.e., by implementing Futa’s SN addition request message information into Pala’s SN addition request message), and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (i.e., the combination does not cause create a new situation that would change the functionality separately described in Pala and Futa). The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (i.e., because both Pala and Futa use similar SN addition request messages). In addition, a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to achieve the functionality (e.g., to enable acknowledgement of the candidate PSCells that have been accepted or prepared) and advantages (see [0040] for example) described in Futa. Claim 8 With respect to claim 8, Pala taught: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), further comprising: receiving, by the MN from the UE, an RRC complete message to inform the execution of the change from the source to the target, wherein the RRC complete message including a second RRC complete message to the target ([0095] At 570, the UE 120 may transmit an RRC reconfiguration complete message to the target BS 110-2. The RRC reconfiguration complete message may indicate that UE 120 has released the connection with source BS 110-1. [0096] At 575, the target BS 110-2 may transmit a UL RRC transfer to CU 502. In some aspects, the UL RRC transfer may be made in response to receiving the RRC reconfiguration complete message and may indicate that the RRC reconfiguration complete message was received from UE 120.). Pala taught the limitations of claim 8 discussed above, including use of RRC complete messages to information about transferring from a source to a target, but Pala does not explicitly teach “ receiving, by the MN from the UE, a RRC complete message to inform the execution of the change from the source SN to the at least one target SN, wherein the RRC complete message including a second RRC complete message to the target SN .” With respect to claim 8, Futa teaches: receiving, by the MN from the UE, a RRC complete message to inform the execution of the change from the source SN to the target SN, wherein the RRC complete message including a second RRC complete message to the target SN ([0117] FIG. 13 shows an example of the operation of the MN 1, S-SN 2, T-SN 4, and UE 3 with respect to an SN-initiated inter-SN CPC. In step 1301, the S-SN 2 initiates an inter-SN CPC procedure by sending an SN Change Required message (e.g., SgNB Change Required or S-NODE Change Required) to the MN 1. In this message, the S-SN 2 indicates the CPC initiation to the MN 1. This message contains the identifier of the T-SN 4. This message further contains a CPC execution condition. [0119] In step 1303, the T-SN 4 sends to the MN 1, via an SN Addition Request Acknowledge message, the PSCell ID( s) of the one or more candidate PSCells that have been accepted ( or prepared). [0120] In step 1304, the MN 1 sends an MN RRC (connection) reconfiguration message to the UE 3 to instruct the UE 3 to perform a conditional reconfiguration for the CPC. [0121] In step 1305, the UE 3 transmits a first MN RRC reconfiguration complete message to the MN 1, which is the response to the MN RRC reconfiguration message of step 1304. [0123] In step 1307, the UE 3 then detects that the CPC execution condition is satisfied for one of the candidate PSCells. In step 1308, in response to the CPC execution condition being met, the UE 3 sends a second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message to the MN 1. The second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message contains an SN RRC response message (SN RRC reconfiguration complete message) addressed to the T-SN 4. [0124] In step 1309, the MN 1 informs the T-SN 4 of the success of the SN RRC Reconfiguration procedure via an SN Reconfiguration Complete message. The SN Reconfiguration Complete message forwards the SN RRC reconfiguration complete message contained in the second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message to the T-SN 4.). Claim 9 With respect to claim 9, Pala in view of Futa taught: The method of claim 8 (see rejection above). With respect to claim 9, Pala taught: informing about execution conditions and candidate SNs using RRC messages, and informing the target SN of the candidate PSCell identification information whose candidate cell configuration is maintained at the UE side ([0124] At step 7, the MN 100b may transmit the execution conditions (e.g. execution criteria) and the candidate SN list to the UE 120 in an RRC configuration message ( e.g., "RRC Reconfiguration message" for NR) to the UE 120… In some examples the RRC configuration message may include one or more of: (i) source cell RRC configuration changes (if any), (ii) conditional SN addition or change execution criteria for each candidate cell in the set ( configured by MN 110b), and/or (iii) RRC reconfiguration for each CSN. [0127] As illustrated, should the SN 110a decide to change the candidate SN list, the SN 110a, may initiate another conditional SN change by sending to MN 110b, at step 8, in an Xn message, a new candidate SN add list. Because UE 120 channel conditions are constantly changing, the UE 120 may send subsequent measurements reports after a certain time. The new measurement reports (for example, a measurement report sent at time t2) may be different than the measurement report sent at step 1 (i.e., the measurement report sent at time tl). Thus, the new measurement report may indicate to the SN that certain candidate cells may no longer be suitable for the candidate SN list. [0128] In some examples, as illustrated in FIG. 9, the SN 110a may decide to release CSN2 and include only CSN1 in the SN add list. Thus, at step 9, MN 110b may transmit the candidate add/release list to the UE 120. Further, MN 110b may perform an SN release procedure with CSN2, at steps 10 and 11.) With respect to claim 9, Futa taught: wherein the second RRC complete message to the at least one target SN comprises the candidate information ([0123] In step 1307, the UE 3 then detects that the CPC execution condition is satisfied for one of the candidate PSCells. In step 1308, in response to the CPC execution condition being met, the UE 3 sends a second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message to the MN 1. The second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message contains an SN RRC response message (SN RRC reconfiguration complete message) addressed to the T-SN 4. [0124] In step 1309, the MN 1 informs the T-SN 4 of the success of the SN RRC Reconfiguration procedure via an SN Reconfiguration Complete message. The SN Reconfiguration Complete message forwards the SN RRC reconfiguration complete message contained in the second MN RRC reconfiguration complete message to the T-SN 4.). The Examiner finds that it 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 to incorporate Futa’s use of RRC complete messaging to the target SN for SN reconfiguration with Pala’s techniques, which are use RRC for similar purposes, and inform the target SN of candidate information since doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)). At a high level, RRC signaling is a known technique in wireless communications, Pala describes use of RRC for similar purposes without specifically mentioning that RRC signaling can be used to inform about candidate changes, and Futa describes the use of RRC messages comprising second RRC messages. The Examiner finds that the prior art (i.e., Pala and Futa) included each element claimed as discussed above, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference as discussed above. The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (i.e., by implementing Futa’s RRC complete message to the MN comprising a second RRC complete message to the target SN into Pala’s candidate list change/maintenance technique), and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (i.e., the combination does not cause create a new situation that would change the functionality separately described in Pala and Futa). The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (i.e., because both Pala and Futa use similar SN addition techniques and similar RRC signaling). In addition, a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to achieve the functionality and advantages described in Futa. Claim 13 Claim 13 recites limitations similar to claim 4 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 17 Claim 17 recites limitations similar to claim 8 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 18 Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claim 9 and is rejected by the same reasoning. Claim 20 Claim 20 recites limitations similar to claim 9 and is rejected by the same reasoning. CLAIM 5 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pala (US 2021/0136638 A1) in view of Wu (US 2020/0396661 A1) . Claim 5 With respect to claim 5, Pala taught: The method of claim 1 (see rejection above), further comprising: sending, by the MN to the UE, a second RRC message to remove the indicated candidate cell configuration ([0124] At step 7, the MN 100b may transmit the execution conditions (e.g. execution criteria) and the candidate SN list to the UE 120 in an RRC configuration message ( e.g., "RRC Reconfiguration message" for NR) to the UE 120. In some examples, the RRC configuration message may configure the UE 120 for multiple candidate SNs in a single message. For example, the RRC configuration message may include configuration information for both CSNl and. In some examples the RRC configuration message may include one or more of: (i) source cell RRC configuration changes (if any), (ii) conditional SN addition or change execution criteria for each candidate cell in the set ( configured by MN 110b), and/or (iii) RRC reconfiguration for each CSN. [0128] In some examples, as illustrated in FIG. 9, the SN 110a may decide to release CSN2 and include only CSN1 in the SN add list. Thus, at step 9, MN 110b may transmit the candidate add/release list to the UE 120. Further, MN 110b may perform an SN release procedure with CSN2, at steps 10 and 11. [FIG. 10] 9/ RRC (CONN.) RECONFIGURATION(CONDITIONAL SCG ADDITIONCHANGE INFO: CANDIDATE SCG INFO, EXECUTION CONDITION FOR SCG ADDITION, EXECUTION CONDITION FOR SCG CHANGE, SN CONFIGURED CONDITIONAL SN CHANGE INFO: (ADD/RELEASE LIST).); and sending, by the MN, an indication to inform the release of the indicated candidate cell configuration ([0128] In some examples, as illustrated in FIG. 9, the SN 110a may decide to release CSN2 and include only CSN1 in the SN add list. Thus, at step 9, MN 110b may transmit the candidate add/release list to the UE 120. Further, MN 110b may perform an SN release procedure with CSN2, at steps 10 and 11. [FIG. 10] 9/ RRC (CONN.) RECONFIGURATION(CONDITIONAL SCG ADDITIONCHANGE INFO: CANDIDATE SCG INFO, EXECUTION CONDITION FOR SCG ADDITION, EXECUTION CONDITION FOR SCG CHANGE, SN CONFIGURED CONDITIONAL SN CHANGE INFO: (ADD/RELEASE LIST). [0128] In some examples, as illustrated in FIG. 9, the SN 110a may decide to release CSN2 and include only CSN1 in the SN add list. Thus, at step 9, MN 110b may transmit the candidate add/release list to the UE 120. Further, MN 110b may perform an SN release procedure with CSN2, at steps 10 and 11. [FIG. 10] 10. SN/SGNBRELEASE REQUEST (CONDITIONAL SN ADDITION)). Pala taught the limitation of claim 5 discussed above, and taught about SN changes, SN addition requests, and SN release. However, Pala did not explicitly teach “ sending, by the MN to the source SN, an indication to inform the release of the indicated candidate cell configuration ” as recited in claim 5. With respect to claim 5, Wu taught: sending, by the MN to the source SN, an indication to inform the release of the indicated candidate cell configuration ([0186] In the first example, the condition-based SCG maintenance process is triggered by MN, and radio interface configuration information is transmitted to UE through MN (MCG). Referring to FIG. 3, the SCG maintenance process includes the following steps. [0189] Step 303: the MN transmits conditional SCG release indication information to a source SN; where the number of the source SN may be one or more. [0190] Step 304: the source SN conditionally releases an SCG cell according to the received conditional SCG release indication information, and feeds back conditional SCG release confirmation information to the MN. [0256] Step 511: after the target SN detects that the UE accesses the target cell, the target SN transmits conditional SCG change indication information to the MN; where content included in the conditional SCG change indication information may refer to the content included in the above conditional SCG change indication information. [0257] Step 512: the MN transmits a release request message to the source SN, so that the source SN releases resources corresponding to the source SCG cell of the UE.). The Examiner finds that it 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 to incorporate Wu’s release information being sent to the source SN with Pala’s technique of transmitting release information since doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(A)). Specifically, the Examiner finds that the prior art (i.e., Pala and Wu) included each element claimed as discussed above, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (i.e., by implementing Wu’s lease information sent to the source SN into Pala’s SN addition request message), and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (i.e., the combination does not cause create a new situation that would change the functionality separately described in Pala and Futa). The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (i.e., because both Pala and WU use similar SN addition and release techniques). In addition, a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to achieve the functionality (e.g., to enable release of source SN resource) and advantages described in Wu. RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS The Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks p.7, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the claim amendments. The objections to the claims have been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments focus on the limitations that were newly added to the claim. The rejection above addressed these newly added limitations. CONCLUSION 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 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 Christopher Davis whose telephone number is 703-756-1832. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 11AM to 7PM ET. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayaz Sheikh, can be reached at telephone number 571 - 272 - 3795. 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 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). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats see MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice. /C.R.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 2476 /AYAZ R SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 2 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 3 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 4 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 5 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 6 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 7 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 8 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 9 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 10 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 11 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 12 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 14 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 15 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 16 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 17 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 18 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 19 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 20 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 21 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 22 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/505,681 Page 23 Art Unit: 2476
Prosecution Insights