DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to Applicant’s remarks submitted March 16, 2025. Receipt is acknowledged of a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) and a submission, filed on April 15, 2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-12 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments have been fully considered, but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2015/0296438 (hereinafter “Wu”), in view of U.S. Publication No. 2020/0077288 (hereinafter “Tsuboi”), in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2018/0063736 (hereinafter “Sadeghi”), alternatively in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2020/0145961 (hereinafter “Harada”), and alternatively in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2019/0182696 (hereinafter “Huang”).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 6, and 9: Wu teaches a method implemented at a terminal device connected to a master network node and a secondary network node, comprising:
obtaining respective measurement results based on respective configurations received from both the master network node and the secondary network node, the respective measurement results associated with frequencies configured by the master network node and the secondary network node (see, e.g., figure 1, [0019] and [0029]-[0032]; UE is configured for dual connectivity and obtains channel measurements); and
in response to a failure related to the secondary network node to which the terminal device was connected, transmitting, to the master network node, a report including the respective measurement results associated with frequencies configured by the master network node and the secondary network node and frequency information associated with the secondary network node (see, e.g., [0027]-[0032] and [0038]; after failure of the secondary BS, measurement results and configuration information are sent to the master BS),
wherein the report indicates an association between the frequency configured by the secondary network node and measurement result associated with the frequency (see, e.g., [0032] and [0038]; note the frequency associated with the measurement results).
Wu does not explicitly state receiving respective configurations from the master network node and the secondary network node (i.e. “receiving a first measurement configuration from the master network node; [and] receiving a second measurement configuration from the secondary network node”). However, Tsuboi teaches a system that significantly overlaps many of the teachings of Wu (see, e.g., [0118], [0119], [0164]-[0165], [0246]; note dual connectivity and the sending of information upon failure to a master network node, including measurements and related information for association), and also teaches wherein the UE receives respective configurations from both the master and secondary nodes (see, e.g., figures 13, 15). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Tsuboi, such as the configuration and/or reporting functionality, within the system of Wu, in order to facilitate dual connectivity and/or failure recovery.
Wu modified by Tsuboi teaches including a frequency and information associated with the measurement results, as well as associated with the secondary network node, but does not explicitly state wherein the information is “about a frequency of a synchronization signal” To the extent these features are not inherent to Wu modified by Tsuboi (see Wu [0032], [0038] – the included frequencies in the reporting are about a frequency of a synchronization signal; see also Tsuboi [0068], [0169], [0195] – the sync signal may be used for measurement), these features are nevertheless taught in Sadeghi. Sadeghi teaches the implementation of measurement-related parameters, indications, and signals (see, e.g., [0076]-[0079], [0086]-[0090]), as well their inclusion in measurement reports (see, e.g., [0140], [0146]-[0152], and [0208]; note frequency resources with respect to synchronization signals and reference signals). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Sadeghi, such as the reporting and indication functionality, within the system of Wu modified by Tsuboi, in order to improve correspondences to measurement results.
Wu modified by Tsuboi and Sadeghi teach including an “association between the frequency of the synchronization signal… and a measurement result” (each reference teaches including associated parameters in the measurement report; see also Tsuboi [0068], Sadeghi [0079]; both teach using a synchronization signal for measurement). To the extent, Wu modified by Tsuboi and Sadeghi does not inherently include the claimed “association,” this feature is nevertheless taught in Harada (see, e.g., [0065], [0074], [0075]; note indication is provided via an offset from a SS block). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Harada, such as the reporting and indication functionality, within the system of Wu modified by Tsuboi and Sadeghi, in order to capitalize on a known reference frequency.
Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada, does not explicitly state the feature wherein the frequency location is “provided by a first new radio, NR, absolute radio frequency channel number, ARFCN, ARFCN-ValueNR.” However, Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada does teach the applicability in a new radio (NR) environment (see, e.g., Tsuboi [0004]), as well as the utilization of ARFCNs (see, e.g., Sadeghi [0087], [0132]). Both Wu and Tsuboi teach the inclusion of associative frequency information with the measurements in the reporting. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to further incorporate the ARFCN functionality of Sadeghi, in order to provide channel information. To the extent the said feature is not inherent by way of the noted teaching/modification above (i.e. identification of a new radio channel), it is nevertheless taught in Huang (see, e.g., the table at [0022]-[0023]; note ARFCNs including ARFCN-ValueNR). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Huang, such as the ARFCN functionality, within the system of Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada, in order to specify a NR channel.
The rationale set forth above regarding the method of claim 1 is applicable to the apparatuses and method of claims 4, 6, and 9, respectively.
Regarding claims 2, 7, and 10: Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, further teaches wherein the synchronization signal is a synchronization signal block, and the frequency information further comprises an offset of the synchronization signal block (see, e.g., Tsuboi [0068], [0134]-[0136]; Sadeghi [0079], [0140], [0141]; Harada [0072], [0074]; Huang table at [0022]-[0023]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 2.
The rationale set forth above regarding the method of claim 2 is applicable to the method and apparatus of claims 7 and 10, respectively.
Regarding claims 3, 5, 8, and 11: Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, further teaches wherein a second frequency location of the reference signal comprises a reference location from which a channel state information-reference signal frequency location is derivable (see, e.g., Sadeghi [0072], [0079], [0095], [0137], and [0152]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 3.
The rationale set forth above regarding the method of claim 3 is applicable to the apparatuses and method of claims 5, 8, and 11, respectively.
8. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu, in view of Tsuboi, in further view of Sadeghi, alternatively in further view of Harada, alternatively in further view of Huang, and alternatively in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2011/006543 (hereinafter “Neil”).
Regarding claim 12: Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, does not explicitly state wherein the frequency information further comprises information about a frequency location of a reference signal and the frequency location of the reference signal is provided by a second ARFCN-ValueNR. However, Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, teaches including measurements and associative information for multiple frequencies and/or channels, including wherein the information is “about” a frequency location of a synchronization signal and reference signal. Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, also teaches utilizing ARFCN to this effect, but does not explicitly state using a second ARFCN. To the extent the incorporation of a second (or multiple ARFCNs) in a message is not inherent to Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang (see, e.g., Huang table at [0022]-[0023]), it nevertheless would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to extrapolate the usage of a multiple ARFCNs from this same teaching. One would have been motivated as such because of the applicability to multiple frequencies and associative information reporting taught in Wu and Tsuboi.
Alternatively, Neil teaches including multiple ARFCNs (see, e.g., [0021], [0048]-[0050). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Neil, such as the multi-ARFCN functionality, within the system of Wu modified by Tsuboi, Sadeghi, and alternatively Harada and/or Huang, in order to indicate multiple channels.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SLOMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (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 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.
/NICHOLAS SLOMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights