DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on November 25, December 04, 2023, March 20 and April 01, 2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II corresponding to claims 9-12 and 21-24 in the reply filed on March 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 and 13-20 have been canceled. New claims 25-32 have been added. Accordingly, claims 9-12, and 21-32 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 25-27, Applicant's specification discusses means for receiving, means for estimating and means for performing a handover in paragraph [0033], however there is not description of the structures of the means.
Claim 28 is rejected as being dependent upon rejected claim 25 above.
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 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention.
Claim elements, means for receiving, means for estimating and means for performing a handover in claims 25-27 are elements that invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function, thus these claims are indefinite.
Claim 28 is rejected as being dependent upon rejected claim 25 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9, 12, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vargantwar (US 8,644,261).
Regarding claim 9, Vargantwar teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (FIG. 2, access terminal 200), comprising:
one or more memories (FIG. 2, data storage device 210); and one or more processors (FIG. 2, processor 202) coupled with the one or more memories (col 9, ln 38-43) and configured to cause the UE to:
receive, via a sensor included within the UE (FIG. 2, RF transceiver 206), information associated with a first network node and a second network node (col 13, ln 37-42, “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) detecting that a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) exceeds, by at least a handoff threshold, a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the second base station (for example, base station 75).” It is understood both pilot signals from base station 77 and 75 are received);
estimate a location of the second network node based at least in part on the information associated with the first network node and the second network node (col 12, ln 46-49 “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) comparing a distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) to a registration distance associated with the first base station (for example, base station 63). Prior to making the comparison at block 408, processor 202 may determine the distance between the first base station and the third base station by executing program instructions of CRPI 220.” Col 10, ln 7-8, “The base station distance data may be determined from the base station location data.” Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”); and
perform a handover of the UE from the first network node to the second network node based at least in part on the estimation of the location of the second network node (col 13, ln 55 – col 14, ln 3, “if the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) determines that the distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station is greater than the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal registering with the second base station (for example, base station 75), otherwise, if the access terminal determines that the distance between the first base station and the third base station is less than or equal to the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal performing an idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station. In accordance with the case in which access terminal 200 registers with the second base station, after performing that registration, access terminal 200 may perform the idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station (for example, base station 77).”)
Regarding claim 12, Vargantwar teaches claim 9 and further teaches wherein the information associated with the first network node and the second network node comprises environment information that identifies the first network node and the second network node (Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”).
Regarding claim 21, Vargantwar teaches a method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (FIG. 2, access terminal 200), comprising:
receiving, via a sensor (FIG. 2, RF transceiver 206) included within the UE, information associated with a first network node and a second network node (col 13, ln 37-42, “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) detecting that a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) exceeds, by at least a handoff threshold, a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the second base station (for example, base station 75).” It is understood both pilot signals from base station 77 and 75 are received);
estimating a location of the second network node based at least in part on the information associated with the first network node and the second network node (col 12, ln 46-49 “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) comparing a distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) to a registration distance associated with the first base station (for example, base station 63). Prior to making the comparison at block 408, processor 202 may determine the distance between the first base station and the third base station by executing program instructions of CRPI 220.” Col 10, ln 7-8, “The base station distance data may be determined from the base station location data.” Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”); and
performing a handover of the UE from the first network node to the second network node based at least in part on estimating the location of the second network node (col 13, ln 55 – col 14, ln 3, “if the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) determines that the distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station is greater than the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal registering with the second base station (for example, base station 75), otherwise, if the access terminal determines that the distance between the first base station and the third base station is less than or equal to the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal performing an idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station. In accordance with the case in which access terminal 200 registers with the second base station, after performing that registration, access terminal 200 may perform the idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station (for example, base station 77).”)
Regarding claim 24, Vargantwar teaches claim 21 and further teaches wherein the information associated with the first network node and the second network node comprises environment information identifying the first network node and the second network node (Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”).
Regarding claim 25, Vargantwar teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
means (FIG. 2, processor 202) for receiving information associated with a first network node and a second network node (col 13, ln 37-42, “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) detecting that a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) exceeds, by at least a handoff threshold, a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the second base station (for example, base station 75).” It is understood both pilot signals from base station 77 and 75 are received);
means (FIG. 2, processor 202) for estimating a location of the second network node based at least in part on the information associated with the first network node and the second network node (col 12, ln 46-49 “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) comparing a distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) to a registration distance associated with the first base station (for example, base station 63). Prior to making the comparison at block 408, processor 202 may determine the distance between the first base station and the third base station by executing program instructions of CRPI 220.” Col 10, ln 7-8, “The base station distance data may be determined from the base station location data.” Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”); and
means (FIG. 2, processor 202) for performing a handover of the UE from the first network node to the second network node based at least in part on estimating the location of the second network node (col 13, ln 55 – col 14, ln 3, “if the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) determines that the distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station is greater than the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal registering with the second base station (for example, base station 75), otherwise, if the access terminal determines that the distance between the first base station and the third base station is less than or equal to the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal performing an idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station. In accordance with the case in which access terminal 200 registers with the second base station, after performing that registration, access terminal 200 may perform the idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station (for example, base station 77).”)
Regarding claim 28, Vargantwar teaches claim 25 and further teaches wherein the information associated with the first network node and the second network node comprises environment information identifying the first network node and the second network node (Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”).
Regarding claim 29, Vargantwar teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code for wireless communications, the code comprising instructions executable by one or more processors (col 9, ln 38-43) to:
receive, via a sensor (FIG. 2, RF transceiver 206) included within a user equipment (UE), information associated with a first network node and a second network node (col 13, ln 37-42, “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) detecting that a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) exceeds, by at least a handoff threshold, a strength of a pilot signal transmitted by the second base station (for example, base station 75).” It is understood both pilot signals from base station 77 and 75 are received);
estimate a location of the second network node based at least in part on the information associated with the first network node and the second network node (col 12, ln 46-49 “the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) comparing a distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station (for example, base station 71 or base station 77) to a registration distance associated with the first base station (for example, base station 63). Prior to making the comparison at block 408, processor 202 may determine the distance between the first base station and the third base station by executing program instructions of CRPI 220.” Col 10, ln 7-8, “The base station distance data may be determined from the base station location data.” Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”); and
perform a handover of the UE from the first network node to the second network node based at least in part on the estimation of the location of the second network node (col 13, ln 55 – col 14, ln 3, “if the access terminal (for example, access terminal 200) determines that the distance between the first base station (for example, base station 63) and the third base station is greater than the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal registering with the second base station (for example, base station 75), otherwise, if the access terminal determines that the distance between the first base station and the third base station is less than or equal to the registration distance associated with the first base station, then the access terminal performing an idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station. In accordance with the case in which access terminal 200 registers with the second base station, after performing that registration, access terminal 200 may perform the idle-mode handoff from the second base station to the third base station (for example, base station 77).”)
Regarding claim 32, Vargantwar teaches claim 29 and further teaches wherein the information associated with the first network node and the second network node comprises environment information that identifies the first network node and the second network node (Col 19, ln 6-12 “RF signals transmitted from base station 63 to access terminal 200, and subsequently received by RF transceiver 206, may include data associated with base station 63, and that data may include location data that identifies the latitude and longitude of base station 63, and registration distance data associated with base station 63.” Col 18, ln 15-20 “Processor 202 may determine the location of the target base station from location information received at RF transceiver 206 from the target base station. The target base station may transmit the location information to access terminal 200 via an overhead message such as a broadcast control channel message or a paging channel message”).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11, 23, 27 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2014/0038612, “Wang”).
Regarding claim 11, Vargantwar teaches claim 9 and further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover ([0075] “the UE may submit a report about the RLF, or handover failure, or handover success according to the request of the target base station”).
It would have been obvious before the filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover, as taught by Wand in Vargantwar to allow adjustment of handover parameters so that handover reliability and mobility performance can be increased.
Regarding claim 23, Vargantwar teaches claim 21 and further teaches comprising: communicating with the second network node based at least in part on performing the handover.
Wang teaches comprising: communicating with the second network node based at least in part on performing the handover ([0075] “the UE may submit a report about the RLF, or handover failure, or handover success according to the request of the target base station”).
It would have been obvious before the filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover, as taught by Wand in Vargantwar to allow adjustment of handover parameters so that handover reliability and mobility performance can be increased.
Regarding claim 27, Vargantwar teaches claim 25 and further teaches further comprising: means for communicating with the second network node based at least in part on performance of the handover.
Wang teaches further comprising: means for communicating with the second network node based at least in part on performance of the handover ([0075] “the UE may submit a report about the RLF, or handover failure, or handover success according to the request of the target base station”).
It would have been obvious before the filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature further comprising: means for communicating with the second network node based at least in part on performance of the handover, as taught by Wand in Vargantwar to allow adjustment of handover parameters so that handover reliability and mobility performance can be increased.
Regarding claim 31, Vargantwar teaches claim 25 and further teaches wherein the code comprises instructions executable by the one or more processors to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover.
Wang teaches wherein the code comprises instructions executable by the one or more processors to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover ([0075] “the UE may submit a report about the RLF, or handover failure, or handover success according to the request of the target base station”).
It would have been obvious before the filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein the code comprises instructions executable by the one or more processors to: communicate with the second network node based at least in part on the performance of the handover, as taught by Wand in Vargantwar to allow adjustment of handover parameters so that handover reliability and mobility performance can be increased.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10, 22 and 30 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anantha et al. (US 2019/0362508) discloses an access point including a camera sensor for tracking objects to facilitate handover services.
Koda et al., “Cooperative Sensing in Deep RL-Based Image-to-Decision Proactive Handover for mmWave Networks”, arXiv, 7 pages, 2019.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOC THAI NGOC VU whose telephone number is (571)270-5901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at 571-272-7915. 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.
/QUOC THAI N VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights