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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's arguments filed 12/13/2023 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants request that the claims be examined together are unpersuasive. As stated in the election/restriction, the claims are independent and/or distinct and do not share a special technical feature, which is a feature that makes a contribution over the prior art. As discussed a conditional handover is independent and/or distinct to a Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) handover, as a conditional handover focuses on when a handover should take place, based on a measurement configuration received at the relay and/or UEs from the source network node, whereas a DAPS handover focuses on actual function of the handover as DAPs is a make-before-break handover. The evaluation of whether or not the target is capable of CHO or DAPs is independent and/or distinct, as addressed in the restriction requirement there is no unity of invention.
As previously stated, the group 1 claims are directed to a method for conditional handover, which is different from a Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) (i.e. Make-Before-Break) handover, as discussed in the group 2 claims. Additionally, the determination of whether the one or more target nodes can support Conditional Handover (CHO) is entirely different than the method for determining whether the target nodes can support DAPs as discussed in the group 2 claims. The restriction requirement is maintained. Group 1 claims will be examined as elected by the applicant in the response dated 01/27/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 3 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 3 and 13 recite, in part, “determining whether a conditional handover can be configured for the moving node”. However, the independent claim(s) recites, in part, “determine, by a source node, whether a conditional handover is configured for the moving node”. Thus, the independent claim recites that the mobile node has or does not have a conditional handover, in contrast to determining whether the conditional handover can be configured. Appropriate correction is required. Additionally, the applicants fig.8 and par.[0053] describe the source receiving the measurement report, but does not disclose that it is used for determining whether a conditional handover can be configured. Instead the measurement report determines whether the conditional handover can be performed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-8, 11-13, and 17-18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeon et al. (US 2012/0003962 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Jeon discloses:
a moving node (fig.3 element 310 or 312) configured to perform handover for a group of user equipments (UEs) (fig.3 and par.[0002] the group handover) in a wireless communications system (fig.3 which depicts a wireless communications system), wherein the group of UEs is connected to the moving node (fig.4 depicts the MRS with MS1 and MS2 communicatively coupled to the MRS), the moving node comprising:
a transceiver (fig.3 depicts the MRS communicating wirelessly over wireless communications links with MS, and base station, which requires a transceiver); and
a controller (fig.3 the MRS would comprise a processor) configured to control the transceiver,
wherein the controller is configured to:
perform the method for conditional handover (par.[0105] and fig.10 which describes the Mobile Relay Station (MRS) identifying a trigger for handover, and determining that handover is necessary) for a group of user equipment's (UE) (par.[0002] describes the group handover procedures) connected to a moving node (fig.1 depicts a Relay Station (RS) element 104, wherein the RS is a mobile RS, par.[0002]), the method comprising:
determining, by a source node (par.[0105] the serving eNodeB), whether a conditional handover (CHO) is configured for the moving node (par.[0105] which recites, in part, “a measurement trigger condition received from the serving eNode B is satisfied”. As the serving eNB transmits the conditions for the conditional handover to the mobile relay station, the serving eNB knows that the MRS can perform a conditional handover);
transmitting, by the source node (fig.4 element 416), a conditional handover request (fig.4 element 416, and par.[0055] which recites, in part, “Next, the serving BS 406 transmits a handover request (HO-REQ) message for requesting the handover of the MRS 404 to the target BS 408 via the backhaul in step 416.” Also fig.6 element 609) message along with information to one or more target nodes based on the determination (fig.4 element 416, par.[0055] which recites, in part, “In so doing, the serving BS 406 piggybacks and transmits the authentication request (Pre-AUTH_REQ) message received from the MSs 400 and 402 on the handover request (HOP-REQ).”. That is, the MSs 400 and 402 are MSs which are currently coupled with the ), wherein the information includes a number of a plurality of user equipment (UEs) (par.[0055] which teaches that the serving BS sends request to the MS1 and MS2 based on the HO_REQ sent by the MRS. The serving eNB element 406 transmits the HO_REQ to a one or more target eNB, wherein the HO_REQ comprises the information on the MS1 and MS2, see “In so doing, the serving BS 406 piggybacks and transmits the authentication request (Pre-AUTH_REQ) message received from the MSs 400 and 402 on the handover request (HOP-REQ).” The HO_REQ includes the identifiers of each of the MSs connected with the MRS, “Herein, the handover request (HO-REQ) message includes the identifier MSID…….. of the MSs belonging to the MRS 404. By providing the above information the source eNB informs the target eNB of the number of terminals attached to the MRS) and associated capability of each of the plurality of UEs in the group of UEs connected to the moving node (par.[0055] which recites, in part, “Herein, the handover request (HO-REQ) message includes the identifier MSID, an estimated time to HandOver (HO), a required BandWidth (BW), and Quality of Service (QoS) information of the MSs belonging to the MRS 404, and additionally includes the identifier RSID, an estimated time to HO, a required BW, and QoS information of the MRS 404”. That is, the HO-Req includes capability of the MRS, along with the MSs which are connected with the MRS);
determining whether the one or more target nodes support the conditional handover for the moving node based on the received information (fig.4 element 418 via the handover response (HO_RSP), provided by the target eNB to the serving eNB, wherein the target eNB accepts the handover of the MRS along with each of the MSs associated with the MRS, fig.6 element 611 – 613, par.[0094] which recites, in part, “Next, the target eNode B 908 determines whether to approve the handover for part or all of the mobile relay station and the UEs, using the information of the mobile relay station and the UEs recorded in the handover request message.”); and
performing the conditional handover (the aforecited handover) for the moving node (the mobile relay station as discussed above) based on the determination, wherein performing the conditional handover for the moving node includes performing the handover for the group of UEs connected to the moving node (fig.8 and par.[0015] which describes the group handover of the MRS along with the stations associated with the MRS, par.[0043], fig.9).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Jeon discloses:
wherein the moving node act as a UE attached to the source node (fig.1 element 104 the RS is attached to the Serving BS as a UE, and can request handover on behalf of the stations connected to the RS, par.[0004]), wherein the moving node further acts as a moving network for the group of UEs connected to the moving node (fig.4 element 404 moving network, par.[0004] which recites, in part, “a mobile relay station mounted to a fast transport means such as bus or train performs the handover in place of a plurality of terminals existing in the fast transport means and thus provides the seamless and highly reliable service to the plurality of the terminals.”).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Jeon discloses:
determining, by the source node, whether a conditional handover can be configured for the moving node comprises:
receiving, by the source node, a measurement report from the moving node (par.[0087] and fig.9 which describe the transmission of a measurement report from the mobile relay to the source base station, when the mobile relay is conditioned by the condition handover configuration to transmit the measurement report to the source node for handover); and
determining at one of a number of the plurality of user equipment UE in group of UEs, the associated capability of each of the plurality of UEs, and a functionality of the moving node based on the received measurement report (par.[0091] which recites, in part, “When the measurement report message is received from the mobile relay station of the simple type, the serving eNode B 906 collects information relating to the mobile relay station and information relating to UEs 900 and 902 subordinate to the mobile relay station in step 912, and then generates based on the collected information and transmits a handover request message to the target eNode B 908 in step 914. That is, the serving eNode B 906 collects radio resource information of the mobile relay station, additionally collects the number of UEs subordinate to the mobile relay station”).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Jeon discloses:
transmitting, by the source node (fig.4 element 416), a handover request (fig.4 element 416, and par.[0055] which recites, in part, “Next, the serving BS 406 transmits a handover request (HO-REQ) message for requesting the handover of the MRS 404 to the target BS 408 via the backhaul in step 416.” Also fig.6 element 609) message along with information to one or more target nodes based on the determination (fig.4 element 416, par.[0055] which recites, in part, “In so doing, the serving BS 406 piggybacks and transmits the authentication request (Pre-AUTH_REQ) message received from the MSs 400 and 402 on the handover request (HOP-REQ).”. That is, the MSs 400 and 402 are MSs which are currently coupled with the ), wherein the information includes a number of a plurality of user equipment (UEs) (par.[0055] which teaches that the serving BS sends request to the MS1 and MS2 based on the HO_REQ sent by the MRS. The serving eNB element 406 transmits the HO_REQ to a one or more target eNB, wherein the HO_REQ comprises the information on the MS1 and MS2, see “In so doing, the serving BS 406 piggybacks and transmits the authentication request (Pre-AUTH_REQ) message received from the MSs 400 and 402 on the handover request (HOP-REQ).” The HO_REQ includes the identifiers of each of the MSs connected with the MRS, “Herein, the handover request (HO-REQ) message includes the identifier MSID…….. of the MSs belonging to the MRS 404. By providing the above information the source eNB informs the target eNB of the number of terminals attached to the MRS) and associated capability of each of the plurality of UEs in the group of UEs connected to the moving node (par.[0055] which recites, in part, “Herein, the handover request (HO-REQ) message includes the identifier MSID, an estimated time to HandOver (HO), a required BandWidth (BW), and Quality of Service (QoS) information of the MSs belonging to the MRS 404, and additionally includes the identifier RSID, an estimated time to HO, a required BW, and QoS information of the MRS 404”. That is, the HO-Req includes capability of the MRS, along with the MSs which are connected with the MRS);
determining whether the one or more target nodes support the conditional handover for the moving node based on the received information (fig.4 element 418 via the handover response (HO_RSP), provided by the target eNB to the serving eNB, wherein the target eNB accepts the handover of the MRS along with each of the MSs associated with the MRS, fig.6 element 611 – 613, par.[0094] which recites, in part, “Next, the target eNode B 908 determines whether to approve the handover for part or all of the mobile relay station and the UEs, using the information of the mobile relay station and the UEs recorded in the handover request message.”); and
performing the conditional handover (the aforecited handover) for the moving node (the mobile relay station as discussed above) based on the determination, wherein performing the conditional handover for the moving node includes performing the handover for the group of UEs connected to the moving node (fig.8 and par.[0015] which describes the group handover of the MRS along with the stations associated with the MRS, par.[0043], fig.9).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Jeon discloses:
wherein performing the handover for the group of UEs connected to the moving node comprises (fig(s). 4 and 9 depict a handover of a mobile relay node and a group of UE’s communicatively coupled with the mobile relay node):
accepting, by a target node from the one or more target nodes, the handover request message (fig.9 depicts the serving eNodeB forwarding a Handover Request (914) to at least one target eNodeB, par.[0091]);
performing, by the target node, admission control of the moving node and the group of UEs connected to the moving node (par.[0094] which recites, in part, “Next, the target eNode B 908 determines whether to approve the handover for part or all of the mobile relay station and the UEs, using the information of the mobile relay station and the UEs recorded in the handover request message.”);
sending, by the target node, an acknowledgment message indicating the handover is completed (fig.9 element 916, and par.[0094] which recites, in part, “the target eNode B transmit a handover request ACK message indicating the handover approval to the serving eNode B 906 in step 916.”), wherein the acknowledgment message includes an RRCreconfiguration message (par.[0099] which recites, in part, “Next, the serving eNode B 906 generates an RRC connection reconfiguration message including the handover related information contained in the handover request ACK message and transmits the message to the UE 904 in step 920,”, interpreted as the target sends a RRCReconfiguration as the source forwards the information in the ACK message in the RRCReconfiguration message);
forwarding, by the source node, the RRCreconfiguration message to the moving node (par.[0099] as discussed above, the source node forwards the information in the ACK message in the RRCReconfiguration message to the relay and associated User Equipments); and
configuring the handover for the group of UEs based on the received RRCreconfiguration message (par.[0100 – 0103] describes the setup of resources and communications channels between the relay and group of UEs with the new target base station).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon as applied to independent claims 1 and 11, in view of Qualcomm, “Inter-Donor Topology Adaptation Procedures”, R3-211739, Dated May 17th – 28th 2021, and submitted in an IDS by the Applicant.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, the disclosure of Jeon teaches the performing of a handover for a mobile relay, and the UE’s communicatively coupled with that relay, but does not explicitly disclose:
applying the conditional handover configuration for the moving node;
determining whether a physical cell ID (PCI) for the moving node or any configuration associated with the source node or the group of UEs, is changed;
transmitting, by the source node, an RRCReconfiguration message with an indication of new PCI to the group of UEs based on the determination;
applying, by the group of UEs, the received RRCReconfiguration; and sending an radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration complete message to the source node.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Qualcomm teaches:
applying the conditional handover configuration (fig.2 element 3b CHO/HO preparation for the UE) for the moving node (fig.2 IAB-Node, and Chapter 1, Introduction describes migration of IAB DU/MT);
determining whether a physical cell ID (PCI) for the moving node or any configuration associated with the source node or the group of UEs, is changed (fig.2 element 3b Xn CHO/HO preparation wherein the CHO if PCI change);
transmitting, by the source node, an RRCReconfiguration message with an indication of new PCI to the group of UEs based on the determination (fig.2 element 3b depicts IAB-Donor-1 sending a RRC Reconfiguration to the IAB-Node, and relayed by the IAB-Node to the UE(s) communicatively coupled with the IAB-Node, thus, the RRC_Reconfiguration comprises an indication of PCI change, when the target IAB-Donor does not have the same PCI as the source IAB-Donor);
applying, by the group of UEs, the received RRCReconfiguration (fig.2 element 3b the UE(s) receive the relayed RRC_RECONFIGURATION, which would then be applied by the UE(s) connected to the migrating IAB-Node); and
sending an radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration complete message to the source node (fig.2 element 3e, wherein the UE forward an RRC_RECONFIGURATION message after applying the CHO w/PCI change, and relays the RECONFIGURATION message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Jeon with the disclosure of Qualcomm. The motivation/suggestion would have been to prevent signaling irregularities or RLF when the PCI of the target donor is different from the source donor.
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon as applied to independent claims 1 and 11, in view of Pan et al. (US 2014/0073330 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Jeon discloses:
performing admission control for the group of UEs (par.[0094] which will be further discussed below) by:
determining whether all or some of the plurality of UEs or the moving node or the source node acting as a UE is not supported by the target node (par.[0094] which recites, in part, “Next, the target eNode B 908 determines whether to approve the handover for part or all of the mobile relay station and the UEs, using the information of the mobile relay station and the UEs recorded in the handover request message”).
However, the disclosure does not teach:
rejecting the conditional handover request based on the determination; and
sending a conditional handover request rejection message to the source node.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Gunnarsson teaches:
rejecting the conditional handover request based on the determination (par.[0031] describes making an admission control decision and accepting or rejecting a relay); and
sending a conditional handover request rejection message to the source node (par.[0031] describes the target transmitting a handover request response rejecting the handover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Jeon for providing a relay handover method, with the disclosure of Pan for providing an acceptance or rejection of the relay by a target node. The motivation/suggestion would have been to properly handover a relay to a target node that is capable of supporting relay devices.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the disclosure of Pan teaches:
transmitting, by the target node, a conditional handover message indicating the number of the UEs supported by the target node (par.[0049] which recites, in part, “the chain handover response will be a chain handover request NACK message ("C-handover NACK") in step S211, in which the chain handover response may include a unsuccessful flag, the amount of j mobile relays it can accept (wherein j.gtoreq.0), and a confirmation of Tc timer list.”); and
deciding, by the source node, whether to continue with the conditional handover based on the received conditional handover message (par.[0049] which recites, in part, “The source DeNB 164 that receives the chain handover request NACK message will perform handover procedures for first j mobile relays by the operation of chain handover control function in step S213. In one embodiment, for the rest of the mobile relays which is/are not allowed to perform the chain handover procedure will receive a conventional measurement control from the source DeNB 164 for performing the conventional measurement and handover as usual.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Tenny et al. (US 2022/0116841 A1) “Conditional Handover for Relay and Remote UEs in a UE-to-Network Relay System”
Wei et al. (US 2023/0239763 A1) “Communications Device, Communications Nodes in a Wireless Communications Network and Methods”
Jeon et al. (US 2012/0003962 A1) “Group Handover Method and Apparatus in Broadband Wireless Communication System that Support Mobile Relay Station”
Yu et al. (WO 2013/070244 A1) “Method and System for Mobile Relay Enablement”
Hu et al. (US 2022/0225203 A1) “Communication Method and Communications Apparatus”
Bakker et al. (US 2024/0251031 A1) “User Equipment (UE) Configuration for Accessing a Target Cell in an Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) Network”
Zhu et al. (US 2023/0371110 A1) “Communication Method Applied to Integrated Access and Backhaul IAB System and Communication Apparatus”
Tamaki et al. (US 2013/0183971 A1) “System and/or Methods for Providing Relay Mobility”
Fujishiro et al. (US 2021/0219368 A1) “Relay Apparatus”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411